5 Larne eneatatentinnre to TT gover ttennncs* 
eR ar men nt Oe Een nen Oe 





LIBRARY OF THE THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY 
PRINCETON. N. J. 


PRESENTED BY 


Th e A ens Care 


DICT Ky 1+) Saal 


BT 1101>:. B48. 1924 
Bergen, John Tallmadge. 
Evidences of Christianity 









NUE EN 
Y % 


OEP 71929 
Q 


EVIDEN C E S Logica stX 
of 


CHRISTIANITY 


By 
: * 
JOHN TALLMADGE BERGEN, A.B., A.M., D.D. 


Minister of the First Presbyterian Church 
Minneapolis, Minn. 





ROBERT SCHELL PROFESSOR OF EVIDENCES OF 
CHRISTIANITY, HOPE COLLEGE, 
HOLLAND, MICH. 
1895-1904 


3 


AUGSBURG PUBLISHING HOUSE 
MINNEAPOLIS, MINN. 


Copyright, 1902 and 1916 
By 
THE Rev. JoHN TALLMADGE Bercen, A. M. 


ALL RicHTs RESERVED. citjunns fae 


Cepyright 1924 
By 
THE REV, JOHN TALLMADGR BERGEN, D. Bb. 





oe ORY Bis poe Brae. CA EOS 


27 Gillyouse Abenue (4 
Nem Haven Cogn. 


fh 27 199 e- 
hee of. 7 beg ui 
Din. Fe, 
Dr wth - etamar. form Farid, 
ef aalaendls Atma 4 ft 
chek L£ hn that fom 


Wo Momo Re, Powter 





PREFACE 


Tuls book is a brief, new statement of the 
standard historical arguments for Christianity, for 
popular use and for short courses in Evidences of 
Christianity. 

Many great and profound works on this subject 
have been written from the days of Justin Martyr; 
and many very valuable small books have enriched 
this field of literature, among which ‘‘Fisher’s Man- 
ual of Christian Evidences” has no peer. Thousands 
of American college students owe to this manual the 
strength of their religious faith. However, certain 
questions have arisen concerning the Old Testament, 
the Divine Existence, the relation of modern science 
to miracles, etc., which are not treated at any length 
in the “Manual.” 

To meet these issues, we have recast into new 
form some of the old truths and have added some 
that are new. 

A “New Spinozism” is standing to-day in the 
path of Christian progress and striking lusty blows 
at miracles. The materialistic tendencies of our 
times are clothed and fed by this monistic, mechan- 
ical hypothesis of the universe. 

Another form of pantheism of a mental character 


6 PREFACE 


is being propagated. The advocates of these cults, 
quoting “‘God is all,’ make the illogical conversion 
and affirm “therefore all is God’’; and since ‘‘God is 
spirit,” therefore ‘“‘All is Spirit, or Mind.” From 
this fallacy it is easy sailing into a most corrupt and 
bigoted Mentalism. It disowns Jesus Christ the 
Savior; it divides Jesus and Christ; it is splits 
anti- Christian. 

All these false teachings have arisen in the past 
Christian ages, and always have been met and de- 
prived of their power and influence by the restate- 
ment of the historical Evidences of Christianity. 

Then, also, the great shift that biology has caused 
in the theories of evolution during the last few 
years, calls for a restatement of the relation between 
scientific evolution and revealed creation... | 

Then, also, the new Oriental archeology has be- 
come a mighty factor in the argument for Chris- 
tianity in its relation to the Old Testament. 

These new, revived forms of attack and these new 
counter weapons for an advance would call for a re- | 
statement of the classical argument. 

The neglect of sound, doctrinal teaching in the 
pulpits and class-rooms of our churches is producing 
a dangerous condition of Christian life and experi- 
ence. Multitudes believe uncertainly in Jesus Christ. 
A brief and fairly accurate statement of Christian 
Evidences, while it cannot take the place of a cate- 
chism, can to a large degree ground its student firmly 





PREFACE 7 


in the historical Jesus Christ and the certainties of 
His religion. 

Paul straightened out the “foolish,” “bewitched 
Galatians” by ‘evidently’ setting forth ‘Jesus 
Christ crucified.” 

We, with blessed memories, acknowledge our in- 
debtedness to the late Dr. William Henry Campbell, 
President of Rutgers College, N. J. 

From the notes which the author wrote while 
studying under the same grand old teacher, many 
points in this volume have been derived—although 
they but poorly represent the master-mind which 
forty years ago, inspired them. 

The late Henry Watterson, lifelong editor of 
the Louisville Courier-Journal, and the Nestor of 
American journalists, says in his autobiography, 
‘‘Never in the history of the world was Jesus of 
Nazareth so interesting and predominant.”’ 

The late Dr. Philip Schaff, who was my beloved 
teacher, said: “‘Jesus of Nazareth is the one abso- 
lute and unaccountable exception to the universal 
experience of mankind. He is the great central 
miracle of the whole gospel history—.”’ 


JOHN TALLMADGE BERGEN. 
Minneapolis, Minn., Jan. 1, 1923. 


1 The Greek word is from prographein, meaning to demonstrate 
openly. 





INTRODUCTION 
DEFINITION 


EVIDENCES of Christianity is an argument prov- 
ing that Jesus Christ, as prophesied in the Old 
Testament and revealed in the New, is an historical, 
supernatural person: that the Gospels, Acts and 
Epistles are genuine, trustworthy accounts of His 
life and teachings: and that CHRISTIANITY is the 
divine religion. Evidences of Christianity must be 
distinguished from Apologetics.’ Apologetics is a sys- 
tem of apology or defense of all the points of Chris- 
tian doctrine against an actual assault. Apologetics 
is broader than Evidences, and has become a branch 
of scientific theology. Evidences of Christianity is 
aggressive. It builds up a positive, logical argu- 
ment, the conclusion of which is that Jesus and 
Christianity are all that they claim to be, viz.: Di- 
vinely inspired and supernatural. 


NATURE OF THE EVIDENCE 


Evidence, from ‘‘e’’ intensive, and ‘‘video”’ to see, 
means the ground by which that which claims to be 
truth is made clear to the mind. There are two kinds 


1 Bruce, Apologetics—p. 33. 


10 INTRODUCTION 


of evidence, demonstrative and moral. Demonstra- 
tive evidence is argument with necessary truth; L.e., 
truth that cannot be otherwise. ‘The proof that the 
square of the hypotenuse of a right angled triangle 
is equal to the sum of the squares of the base and 
altitude is demonstrative evidence. Every step in the 
argument is a necessary truth. It is evident that this 
kind of reasoning cannot apply to Evidences of 
Christianity, nor to any science except pure mathe- 
matics. | 
Moral evidence is argument with contingent or 
moral truth; i.e., truth the contrary of which might 
have been. Astronomy proceeds by moral evidence. 
Its foundation is pure mathematics; but its conclu- 
sions, derived through the telescope and spectro- 
scope, depend upon the human senses, and hence an 


element of uncertainty must enter which makes the | 


evidence probable or, moral. 
Moral evidence may amount to certainty, and its 
conclusion may be as firmly established in our belief 


as that of demonstrative evidence. Nearly all things 
that we believe, when examined as to their proof,. 


will be found dependent upon moral evidence. 
Demonstrative evidence applies not to facts but to 
assumptions, which are necessary to thought and 
exist only in pure reasoning. Evidences of Chris- 
tianity employs facts of nature and history, hence 
its reasoning is moral like that of all other applied 
sciences. 





INTRODUCTION 11 


INTERNAL AND EXTERNAL 


Evidences of Christianity may employ internal 
and external proof. The internal proof is in the 
consciousness of the believer in the experience of his 
soul. It includes all that Christianity is to the 
converted man.” The craving of every thoughtful 
soul for the very satisfaction that Christianity gives, 
is also internal proof. But this is not satisfactory 
to all, nor can it be entirely satisfactory to any who 
desire to know why they believe. Christianity is a 
religion of the heart and of the head as well. It is 
a conquering faith, thrusting itself upon men’s at- 
tention, compelling investigation, declaring itself as 
the only solution of life, sin and death. Hence the 
internal proof alone is not enough for our science, 
although it satisfies the heart enlightened by divine 
grace. 

The external proof relies upon testimony and rea- 
soning. ‘The testimony is all documentary and his- 
torical, and must be weighed and judged in like man- 
ner with all such testimony, with this exception, that 
the miraculous element in Christian testimony can 


be shown to be rationally necessary and in no way in- 
credible. | 


1 Stearns, Evidence of Christian Experience. 

2 A former judge of one of our courts said to me, “I have 
enough evidence in my own experience to prove Christianity 
a supernatural religion.” 


12 INTRODUCTION 


CUMULATIVE EVIDENCE 


Evidences of Christianity are cumulative. By cu- 
mulative evidence we mean an aggregate of facts, in 
many cases entirely independent of each other, all 
pointing to or assisting in the construction of one con- 
clusion. A chain or series of testimonies, each link 
of which is derived from its predecessor, is not cu- 
mulative. This chain will be as weak as its weakest 
link. But cumulative evidence is a center of proof, 
the result of many lines of testimony, each of which 
is admissible and independent, and all focusing in the 
one triumphant conclusion. Such a system of proof 
furnishes the strongest ground of belief. If an oppo- 
nent should attack one of the lines of proof, the fact 
that there are others converging with it to its con- 
clusion, makes it so much the stronger to sustain an 
assault. Injury done to one line of proof counts for . 
little so long as the others stand. All must be assailed 
and destroyed before their conclusion can be denied. 
Circumstantial evidence, if it have this character, and 
if there be enough of it, becomes stronger than any 
other kind of evidence; because it is impossible to 
invent a number of independent circumstances and 
make them so connected as to amount to the proof 
of the point without introducing a tremendous possi- 
bility of mistake or falsehood contradicting the main 
issue.’ 


1 See article on Evidence in Encyclopedia Britannica. 





INTRODUCTION 13 


SCOPE OF THE INQUIRY 


The subject-matter treated will include the Proof 
of the Divine Existence, the Probability of a Super- 
natural Revelation, the Possibility and Probability 
of Miracles, the Authenticity of the Old Testament, 
the Testimony of Roman ‘Historians, the Genuine- 
ness and Credibility of the New Testament Writ- 
ings, the Character of Jesus, the Resurrection, Paul, 
the Monuments and Rise of the Church, Evidence 
from Prophecy, the Moral Excellence of Christian- 
ity and the Evidence from Experience. 


THE AIM 


The aim of Evidences of Christianity is not direct- 
ly to change the hearts, but to convince the minds of 
its students. And yet the heart cannot be closed to the 
winning power of Jesus Christ, however intellectually 
He may be studied.’ In this study every student 
is on trial. 

“The end in view is not to remove skeptical 
doubts, but to gain a clear conviction of duty. We 
do not divest ourselves of all belief in the divinity of 
Christianity and then seek to prove it. But retain- 
ing all that we now believe of this institution, we 
confidently expect to feel ourselves more and more 
in the presence of the best, noblest, wisest and 
mightiest work of God that is revealed to men. We 


1 Fisher’s Manual—p. 8. 


14 INTRODUCTION 


expect to see Christ so clearly that the divinity of 
Christianity shall be as self-evident as the shining 
of the sun.’” 


RESULT 


The result of a sound system of Christian Evi- 
dences will be truly missionary. David Livingstone 
wrote: “Christianity requires continual propagation 
to attest its genuineness.’’ A Christian faith built 
upon a subjective experience alone, would have no 
authority and little power for a missionary propa- 
ganda. On the other hand, the possession of the 
external proofs of Christianity equips and inspires 
the possessor to obey the command, “‘Go ye, there- 
fore, and make disciples of all the nations.” 


1 Lecture of W. H. Campbell, D. D., of Rutgers College, 1883. 





CHAPTER I 


THE DIVINE EXISTENCE 


CHRISTIANITY proclaims itself a supernatural re- 
ligion of which the Absolute Deity is the author. 
Many writers on Evidences of Christianity assume 
the Divine Existence as a truth established by 
natural theology; or they prove Christianity to be 
a divine revelation and hence, through this proof, 
clear away all doubt as to the Divine Existence. It 
seems better to us, at the beginning of our treatise, 
to present the arguments for the existence of God. 
While this is not a part of the historical proof of 
Christianity, it certainly will aid us in considering 
probabilities and preventing objections all along the 
line. If this being of God can be morally proved, 
we then can “show cause”’ for all that is to follow. 


ONTOLOGICAL ARGUMENT 


Anselm of Canterbury presented this argument in 
substance as follows: We have the idea of a most 
perfect being. Nothing greater than this can be con- 
ceived. But this something must exist in re as well 


16 EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY 


as in conceptu. For if it exists only in conceptu, then 
something greater than it could be conceived and that 
as being actual existence also, which is contradictory. 
Therefore that ‘‘something’’ does not exist in con- 
ceptu only, but also in re. Anselm implies that if the 
most perfectly conceivable being does not exist, then 
we can conceive of one who is still greater in his 
existence, and this is contradictory. 

Descartes also presents this argument somewhat 
as follows: ‘In proportion to the clearness of the 
idea is the evidence that it actually represents an 
objective reality. But one of the clearest and most 
prominent ideas actually possessed by man, is the 
idea of one infinitely perfect being.’ 

This argument is open to criticism., It has been 
rightly maintained that logical necessity does not 
prove objective reality.” Admitting that the idea 
of a perfect something is logically necessary, this 
offers no ground from which we can certainly step 
to reality. : 

But the Ontological argument has very important 
use. Dr. Samuel Clarke recast it to meet the English 
Panthesis; and to-day it is one of the legitimate argu- | 
ments, for it removes logical doubts. That the idea 
of God is a logical necessity we stoutly maintain; and 
although there is unproved substantiality, still the 


1 Outlines of Theology—Hodge, p. 18. 
2 Stearns. Evidence of Christian Experience—p. 44. 


THE DIVINE EXISTENCE 17 


argument prepares for the result of the inductive 
arguments—the existence of God is believable. 

We conclude this a priori argument with the 
query: Does not the idea of God prove His sub- 
stantial reality when self-existence is involved? 


THE COSMOLOGICAL ARGUMENT 


Aristotle, among the ancients, and Thomas 
Aquinas, among Christian philosophers, are the 
ablest advocates of this argument. The sequences 
of the universe are effects, the causes of which are 
often discernible and fully agreed upon by all. We 
are obliged to assume a cause for all the sequences 
of the universe, and for all the universe itself. 
Nothing can come into being without cause; the con- 
trary is an absurdity. Now if this be so, then a 
cause which does not come into being, but always 
was, an uncaused cause, must exist. ‘Hence a first 
cause caused the universe. If there were no first 
cause, this universe would be like a chain “hanging 
on nothing.” 

Our only direct knowledge of first cause is in our 
own consciousness. We are immediately conscious 
of ourselves as the cause of our volitions or free 
choices. Society holds us responsible for them. We 
approve or condemn ourselves for them, because 
we are free and first cause of these choices. Thus 
we have the category of free, first cause in our con- 


18 EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY 


stant experience. Therefore reasoning from self, 
the only first cause of which we know is a free 
cause, nor can we conceive of a first cause unless it 
is a free cause. There must be then a first, free 
cause of our universe. This cause must be either 
personal or impersonal. But among other things 
in this universe are intelligent persons. ‘These have 
to be accounted for among the other effects; and an 
adequate cause only can account for them. ‘There- 
fore the first, free cause must be personal. 

Our greatest agnostic, Herbert Spencer, at the 
close of his Synthetic Philosophy, says: “But one 
truth must grow ever clearer—the truth that there 
is an Inscrutable Existence everywhere manifested, 
to which he”’ (the thoughtful observer) ‘“‘can neither 
find nor conceive either beginning or end: Amid | 
the mysteries which become the more mysterious 
the more they are thought about, there will remain 
the one absolute certainty, that he ts ever in presence 
of an Infinite and Eternal Energy, from which all 
things proceed. i? 

This view is quite melancholy, no doubt, to our 
friends the agnostics; but it furnishes a comforting 
conclusion to the Cosmological Argument. | 

Of late there has been a newly awakened inter- 
est in the ‘““Theory of Relativity,” the doctrine that 
all knowledge of particular things is dependent upon 
the relations in which they stand to other things, or 
in which their elements or attributes stand to each 





THE DIVINE EXISTENCE 19 


other. One of our foremost and authoritative 
writers on this subject has produced an inductive 
argument the conclusion of which is that every 
Theory of Relativity is impotent if it attempts to 
represent the Cosmos without including a genuine 
Absolute Being or God." Proceeding from uni- 
versally admitted physical facts, and reasoning syn- 
thetically to all that we can apprehend of the uni- 
verse, we could not conceive it as a complete, orderly 
Cosmos without at the same time apprehending its 
creating, providential God. 


TELEOLOGICAL ARGUMENT 


John Stuart Mill says that the argument from 
design is a genuine inductive argument, and that 
proof from design is not random but universal.’ 

The order and adaptation of nature is the ground 
of this argument. Socrates illustrated it by a statue. 

All works of man are by design, revealing more 
or less the perfection of the designer. All natural 
things are discovered to be designed, 1.e., there is in 
their structure and adaptability to each other a plan 
working toward an end. Therefore we conclude, 
a mind has designed them. ‘‘He that planted the 
ear shall he not hear?” By the same inductive 
process by which we believe in gravitation we believe 
in a design. 

1 See “Scientific Theism vs. Materialism, The Space—Time 


Potential.” Reuterdahl. Edition 1920. 
2 See Fisher’s Natural Theology—p. 20. 


20 EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY 


In nature we see only subordinate ends,.but as 
when we see a spoke we are forced to assume its de- 
sign, not in itself but in a wheel, and then still fur- 
ther its design in the organism of the wagon; so by 
the same foresight we are compelled to assume a 
final end planned by an intelligence. 

Science assumes that nature is the embodiment of 
thought, else science itself would ever be chaotic. 
The human thinker endeavors to unravel the mys- 
teries of the earth, air, sea, sky, etc., and present 
these data in rational order. What is he doing but 
discovering an adjustment which he never made but 
only reproduced? He enjoys it; comprehends it in 
a measure; finds it suitable to his thought. He did 
not design it. Could it be designed by a being less 
than man or equal to man? The thoughtful mind — 
does not leap, but takes a necessary step. An infinite 
mind designed it. 

Does the theory of Evolution invalidate this ar- 
gument? 

Evolution is a present-day theory standing over 
against creation of species in special acts by a sover- 
eign creator. Evolution assumes that each species 
is evolved from the preceding species, either by a - 
sudden change or by very gradual tendency to varia- 
tion with force of heredity perpetuating this. All 
are derived from a few simple forms. The evolving 
process is from the simple to the complex. Their 
surviving or perishing is by natural selection, or, as 





THE DIVINE EXISTENCE 21 


Spencer terms it, “the survival of the fittest.’”” Such 
a theory true or false in no way invalidates the 
Teleological Argument. Indeed there are some 
thinkers who claim that evolution itself is teleolog- 
ical. ‘“‘Notwithstanding the seeming success which 
temporarily marked the first assault of the theory 
of natural selection on the doctrine of final causes, 
it is now becoming more and more evident every 
day that the attempt to explain the universe and all 
it contains in a purely mechanical fashion as to the 
fortuitous outcome of the collision of the blind 
forces, has completely failed; and that the theory 
of Evolution is hopelessly incompetent to solve even 
the simplest biological problems without ultimately 
falling back on a teleological conception of the 
world." 

Evolution sity shifts the question. Why is this 
heredity and tendency to variations? Why Correla- 
tion? Do not these so-called laws prove that wis- 
dom is in the plan? Is not natural selection as a 
law the function of a mind and a will? The “‘fit- 
test” is that which has been endowed with fitness 
for the destined end. If adaptation to environment 
helps to form varieties, then there is evidence of 
design in environment. How did it get there? Is 
the environment a thoughtful being? Is it not more 
rational to believe that a thoughtful being formed 
it for an end? 


1! Maher’s Psychology—p. 526. 


Ze EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY 


THE LATEST EVOLUTION SUPPORTS DESIGN 


Darwinian Evolution is rapidly losing its hold 
among leading biologists. The new theory of ‘‘muta- 
tions” is superseding the old theory of “variations.”’ 
‘“Typical of the new school is the botanist Hugo de 
Vries of Amsterdam. The ‘first steps’ in the origin 
of species according to Dr. de Vries are not fluctuat- 
ing individual variations, but mutations, i.e., deft 
nite and permanent modifications. According to the 
mutation theory a new species arises from the parent 
species, not gradually but suddenly, * * * with- 
out visible preparation and without transitional 
steps.’” | | 

Such evolution as De Vries has demonstrated is 
tantamount to a creative act, and adds a powerful 


element in the argument from design. 


MORAL ARGUMENT 


The Moral Argument proceeds from the con- 
science of man and its recognition of the obligation 
to obey holy law. No one will deny the premise. 
Conscience and obligation to obey the moral law 
are universally admitted. Obedience to the moral 
demand will bring its sure reward, disobedience will 
result in penalty. The moral order can be accounted 
for only on the ground of a moral Governor. Chance 
is an absurd explanation. It cannot be explained by 


a 


1 “At the Deathbed of Darwinism’—p. 18. 





THE DIVINE EXISTENCE 23 


the civil law, nor by social consent, for these derive 
their authority by an appeal to moral law or right 
principle. Evolution assumes that somewhere in 
the cosmic process, the ethical or moral process 
arose. But this does not account for its cause. No 
explanation explains, no assumption is adequate, ex- 
cept that of a moral being who is perfectly holy. 
‘“Through the operations of conscience we discern 
that we are subject to a righteous lawgiver who re- 
wards and punishes. We are brought into contact 
with the moral attitude of the Being in whom we live 
and move. There is within us an immediate, unde- 
niable testimony to His holiness and righteousness.” 
The great bacteriologist, Pasteur, bears this testi- 
mony: ‘‘Posterity will one day laugh at the fool- 
ishness of the modern materialistic philosophers. 
The more I study nature, the more | stand amazed 
at the works of the Creator. I pray while I am en- 
gaged in my work in the laboratory.’’ Virchow was 
not a professed Christian, but he was as much op- 
posed as was Pasteur to the theory of materialistic 
Darwinism. At a convention of anthropologists, 
held in Vienna, Virchow said: ‘The attempt to 
find the transition from animal to man has ended in 
a total failure. The middle link has not been found 
and will not be found. Man is not descended from 
the ape. It has been proved beyond a doubt that 
during the past five thousand years there has been 


1 Fisher’s Manual of Natural Theology—p. 62. 


24 EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY 


no noticeable change in mankind.” ‘The present 
status of this theory has been well presented by Dr. 
Goette, the Strassburgh Professor of Zoology, 
when he says Darwinism has passed through four 
stages of development, namely: (1) The begin- 
nings, when it was received with great enthusiasm; 
(2) the period in which it flourished and found 
general acceptance; (3) the period of transition and 
sober second thought, when its principles and teach- 
ings were called into question; (4) the final period, 
upon which the scientific world has just entered, and 
when its days will evidently soon be numbered, while 
the germ of truth it contained will become a perma- 
nent possession of modern science. 

The Moral Argument is considered by many writ- 
ers on natural theology to be the strongest of all the 
proofs of the divine existence. Many who object to - 
the Cosmological assent to the Moral. Dr. Wm. H. 
Campbell of Rutgers College, speaking of these, 
said: ‘The arguments for the being of God ought 
to be well weighed, and I have no hard names for an 
honest doubter. Hence I do not care how many 
hard knocks, and good hard ones too, great reason- 
ers may give these arguments. If the Cosmological . 
Argument cannot stand, then let it fall under the 
blows, and no tears may be shed, for we still have 
left the citadel of the Moral Argument which they 
believe to be impregnable.’’ However, Dr. Camp- 
bell himself defended the Cosmological Argument. 





THE DIVINE EXISTENCE 25 


We believe that the Cosmological and Moral Argu- 
ments are closely associated; starting from different 
premises both reach their conclusion by means of the 
metaphysics of first cause. 

The Ontological Argument makes Divine Exist- 
ence credible; the Cosmological proves a first cause 
who is being; the Teleological proves an intelligent, 
rational being who designs and destines the universe; 
and the Moral Argument proves that there is a holy, 
absolute, just being. This proof is not perfect dem- 
onstration, but from different premises points us to 
one conclusion so probable that it amounts to cer- 
tainty. 


CHAPTER II 


REVELATION 


REVELATION, as an act, is the direct communica- 
tion of truth from God to man. There is a certain 
knowledge of God, as an existent being, through 
nature, but this is not revelation; the hand of divine 
providence may clearly be discerned in the course of 
history, but this is the result of an induction. Reve- 
lation, as claimed in and from the Scriptures, is the 
body of truth which God has made known to men by 
miraculous means; it could not have been given in 
any other way, and it relates indirectly or. directly 
to men’s moral and spiritual welfare. Inspiration is 
the operation of the Holy Spirit, by which men were 
impelled to publish revelation and were guarded 
from error in doing it. For example, the Law was 
a revelation given of God to Moses at Sinai, and he 
was inspired to write it accurately in a book. That 
there is such a revelation rests upon evidential 
grounds. No one denies that the Bible exists. How 
did it originate? Christianity claims—by revelation 
as stated above.’ We clear the way to direct proof 
by showing that such a revelation is possible, prob- 
able and necessary to man’s well being. 


1 Luke 1:70; Heb. 1:1; 2nd Peter 1:21. 





REVELATION taf | 


REVELATION IS POSSIBLE 


We have concluded that the infinite God is a ra- 
tional, moral being. But man also is rational and 
moral, capable of imparting rational and moral in- 
telligence. The possibility of revelation from the 
infinite to the finite at once becomes apparent. Even 
such an opponent of revelation as Feuerbach, says: 
“With idea of the existence of God is connected the 
idea of revelation.”' The objector to the possi- 
bility of revelation must remove the infinitude of 
God, if he is to maintain his point. 

In treating Revelation and the Divine Existence, 
we are not reasoning in a circle, i.e., proving the for- 
mer from the latter and then the latter from the 
former.. The Bible does not demonstrate the Divine 
Existence, it only assumes the foolishness of the con- 
trary. Our purpose here is to clear away all obsta- 
cles in the way of the future presentation of the 
Scriptures as the revelation of God to man. 


REVELATION IS PROBABLE 


The mythologies of all ancient peoples rest upon 
the belief that supernatural beings can communicate 
with natural. Amid all the wrecks and decay of tra- 
dition, this fibre of truth remains, that man in the 


1 Essence of Christianity-—Evans Trans.—p. 263. 
Feuerbach terms this “the illusion of the religious conscious- 
ness,” / 


28 EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY 


dawn of history must have had sure basis of fact for 
this universal belief. It is most highly probable that 
the creator of a race of rational beings would for 
the enlightenment and advance of His creatures, re- 
veal Himself to them. The unity and order of the 
universe seem to need this. Man is not like a planet; 
but is free, and yearns for God. Were men not sin- 
ful we have every reason to believe that this longing 
would still exist until revelation had satisfied it. 

But the curse of sin is upon man and nothing in 
nature can allay its agony. There is the feeling of 
guilt, and the desire that this pang shall be removed. 
There is the searching of the soul to find a way of 
forgiveness, and a cry for help because of the tyran- 
ny of sin. ‘There is the craving for something after 
this life, for a place of rest and freedom from the 
woes of this earth. There is the fond desire, “this — 
longing after immortality.” There is the instinct 
or habit of prayer. If this is habit, it must have had 
a ground, either instinctive or revealed, from whence. 
it arose. There is the need of more than human 
help in time of sorrow and death. 


GOD IS MERCIFUL 


If God is a moral being, and we have shown that 
He must be, then mercy is one of His attributes. The — 
deplorable condition of the human race in its sinful 
state, almost presumes the revelation of some means 





REVELATION 29 


of relief on the part of a merciful God. In no way 
responsible for the sin of His free creatures, it is 
highly probable that He will not leave them to drift 
onward to an inexorable judgment. 

Even heathen themselves have concluded that 
God spared evil men, to give then Shas aE, for 
repentance. \ 


REVELATION IS NECESSARY 


Apart from the needs of sinful man, the human 
race would need Revelation. Reverence to God is 
absolutely necessary to normal relations between the 
creator and the creature. But man could never know 
how to fitly reverence God if it were not revealed to 
him. Again, duty in general, though recognized, is 
often vague and obscure. Conscience needs aid and 
guidance for its perfecting. It is unlikely that God 
would leave His moral creatures to a life of moral 
uncertainty. Revelation alone can satisfy the prob- 
lem. 

As we shall see hereafter, Christianity alone of 
all the claimants to a revelation meets all these 
needs, satisfies every moral demand, yea, gives far 
beyond every natural craving, and proves itself the 
only revealed religion. There are truths in other 
religions, but Christianity will evidence that it is 
the revealed truth. 


CHAPTER III 
MIRACLES 


SUFFICIENT CAUSE IN DIVINE EXISTENCE 


THE belief in an infinite God, who will most prob- 
ably reveal Himself to His intelligent creatures, 
gives sufficient cause for miracles. In this chapter 
we shall show just and sufficient cause. 

The testimony of human consciousness is that we 
can work changes in the physical world; not by 
thwarting nor overthrowing natural law, but by im- 
posing a higher law, i.e., the law of our free author- 
ity, upon the course of natural law. I throw my 
bunch of keys into the air. I do not violate nor sus- 
pend the law of gravitation; but while the keys are 
going upward a higher law is for the moment im- | 
posed upon the natural law. The same power must 
be granted to the infinite God. His existence is suf- 
ficient cause for the historical Miracles. 


SUFFICIENT CAUSE IN NEED OF REVELATION 


We have seen that man needs Revelation. But 
Revelation cannot be without miraculous attestation. 
Natural law is the ordinary way by which the course 





' MIRACLES 31 


of temporal things moves onward. No divine reve- 
lation can come through this means to meet the issue 
of sin, guilt and death. Nature must ever be help- 
less in their presence. The world needs the convic- 
tion of a personal God to help and save. Such a 
being must reveal Himself as superior to nature. 
Man would never believe, with any ground of hope, 
in a saving God if He had not revealed His way of 
salvation by miracles. That an infinitely good God 
should reveal Himself and His plan of salvation to 
His creatures by miraculous proof is a most rational 
belief. When credible, unimpeached witnesses testi- 
fy to the Resurrection of Jesus, and the human heart 
and hopes evidence the rational need of the Revela- 
tion which this event forever attests, then this mira- 
cle of all miracles becomes the most believable fact 

of history. | 


PANTHEISTIC OBJECTIONS 


Spinoza denied the possibility of miracles on the 
ground that God and nature are identical. ‘The 
virtue and power of nature are the virtue and power 
of God, the laws of nature are the decrees of God. 
Therefore we must conclude that nature is infinite, 
and her laws are so made that they extend to every- 
thing which is conceived by the Divine Nature itself.” 
This philosophy leaves no room for miracles, for if 
nature extends to all possible events no miracle can 


ae EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY 


take place. Many evolutionists of modern times 
stand in Spinoza’s shadow. 

This argument against the possibility of miracles 
falls with the philosophy upon which it is built. Pan- 
theism denies alike the personality of God and man. 
It defies our consciousness that we are personal be- 
ings. It goes under, before the assault of the argu- 
ment for the existence of God, which proves a Cre- 
ator who is a moral person apart from ‘His works. 
It is utterly wrecked on the rocky problem of sin, 
which it must either deny or identify as an attribute 


of God. 


HUME’S OBJECTION 


David Hume is the most celebrated antagonist of 
miracles. While Spinoza denied their possibility, 
Hume denied their credibility, claiming that no 
amount of testimony could prove a miracle. 

‘‘A miracle is a violation of the laws of nature; 
and as a firm and unalterable experience has estab-. 
lished these laws, the proof against a miracle from 
the very nature of the fact is as entire as any argu- 
ment from experience can possibly be imagined. And 
if so it is an undeniable consequence that it cannot 
be surmounted by any proof whatever from testi- 
mony." ‘The only case in which the evidence for 
the miracle could prevail, would be that in which 


} Hopkins on Hume. 





MIRACLES 33 


the falseness or error of the attesting witnesses 
would be a greater miracle than the miracle they 
afirm.’”* Hume would say, you must assume a mira- 
cle to prove a miracle. 


HUME’S FALLACY 


Hume begs the question, i. e., he assumes in his 
premise something not yet proved and indeed the 
very conclusion which he sets out to prove. He 
says you cannot prove what is contrary to the in- 
variability of nature, which, he assumes, a miracle 
is. his is the very point to be proved. A miracle 
is not the violation of the laws of nature, but a new 
and supreme cause, producing a new and miraculous 
effect. We have shown sufficient cause for such 
effects; hence, 'Hume’s argument, aimed at the 
“nature” side, entirely misses the mark, which is 
not nature at all but a superior power who mani- 
fests His energy above nature. Hume’s argument 
can have weight only with those who deny that God 
exists or with those who claim that if He does exist 
it can never be manifest to us. 

Again, as J. S. Mill has shown, “the evidence for 
the unbroken uniformity of nature is diminished in 
force by whatever weight belongs to the evidence 
that certain miracles have taken place:’” and Hume 


1 See Trench on Hume; also Hume’s Essay on Miracles—pp. 
128 and 144. 
4 Fisher’s Manual—p. 16. 


34 EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY 


himself admits in a note after his essay, that there 
may be miracles of such a kind as to admit of proof 
from human testimony, though he denies this , ae 
of the Bible miracles.’ 

Again, our belief in the uniformity of nature is 
the result of testimony, and Dr. Mark Hopkins ex- 
poses the whole sophism of Hume as follows: 
‘“HHume uses the term experience in two senses. 
Personal experience is the knowledge we have ac- 
quired by our own senses. General experience is 
that knowledge of facts which has been acquired 
by the race. If, therefore, Hume says a miracle 
is contrary to his personal experience, that proves 
nothing ; but if he says it is opposed to universal 
experience, that, as has been said, begs the ques- 
tion.’ 


RATIONALISTIC OBJECTIONS 


From Julian the Apostate down to Prof. Huxley 
and his following of rationalistic Evolutionists, it 
has been claimed that miracles are nothing more — 
than the working out of some law of nature itself 
by superior insight. ‘They all rely upon the dogma 
of the “constant mode of operation in natural 
things,’ but fail to consider the great moral cause 
of supernatural or miraculous changes of which we 
have spoken above. ‘This objection on the part of 
the Evolutionists proves too much. Many miracles 


1 Hopkins’ Evidences of Christianity—p. 36. 





MIRACLES 35 


and those best attested would require such a superior 
insight into the workings of natural law, that the 
insight would be miraculous. 


SCIENTIFIC OBJECTIONS 


The present-day objection to belief in miracles is 
based upon scientific grounds. One who stands to- 
day at the height of ethical scholarship says: ‘But 
with the triumph of the scientific mode of thought, 
which starts from the hypothesis of the universal 
reign of law and then seeks to verify it in particular 
cases, the intellect has come to rebel somewhat 
strongly against miracles and magic. * * * There 
are riddles, says science, which we cannot as yet 
solve, but there are no miracles, no occurrences 
which exclude, in principle, the possibility of a nat- 
ural explanation.” 

‘*The Bible miracles are no exception to this rule; 
they belong to a category of world-views which has 
disappeared and cannot long survive them.” 

“Besides it may perhaps be shown that miracles 
not only contradict the scientific conception of our 
age, but also the spirit of our religious faith. “They 
really belong to the polytheistic stage in the evolu- 
tion of Theism; gods work miracles, God works 
no miracles. * * * God alone is an independent be- 
ing, all things are and exist not in themselves, but 
in Him; or according to Spinoza’s formula: God 


36 EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY 


is the substance, the things are the modifications of 
His essence. * * * Whoever takes monotheism 
seriously, whoever regards the difference between 
monotheism and polytheism not as a numerical dif- 
ference, but as a difference in the divine essence, and 
does not look upon God as the only survivor of a 
great host of gods, whoever interprets monotheism 
to mean that God alone truly exists, cannot at the 
same time believe without contradicting himself, 
that He reveals Himself in miracles and signs.’? — 

Prof. Paulsen writes the above reverently and 
with a desire to preserve the Christian faith. We 
think the quotations fairly open up his view, al- 
though not exhausting it. 


ETHICAL ANSWER 


This is perhaps the best representative modern 
attack from one who would hold the faith and drop 
all belief in the miraculous. It may be met upon 
ethical grounds. Its impeachment of Jesus and the 
disciples, either on account of their wilfulness or 
ignorance in deception, is so marked, that all the 
moral basis of Christianity is gone. —The New Tes- 
tament miracles were believed and recorded as facts 
by the disciples of Jesus. Prof. Paulsen says: ‘It 
may be that miracles and signs were once needed 
to strengthen the faith of the Church; at present 


1 See Paulsen’s Ethics, Thilly’s trans—pp. 435 and 436. 





MIRACLES 37 


they merely discredit it.” He evidently means that 

belief in the miracles was needed. But faith must 
have facts beneath it; and we need belief in those 
historical facts just as truly now as did the Apos- 
tolic or Middle-age Christians. 


HISTORICAL ANSWER 


Another feature of this scientific objection is 
eliminated upon historical grounds. ‘The Jews were 
intensely monotheistic after the exile. Four hun- 
dred years of most pronounced monotheism pre- 
ceded the miracles of Jesus Christ and His dis- 
ciples. Their age was the most abundantly mirac- 
ulous the world has ever seen. Monotheism had 
attained its purest form—then came the New Tes- 
tament miracles. 


SCIENTIFIC ANSWER 


But the final answer to the scientific attack upon 
the miracles must be also upon scientific ground. 
The weapon in the hand of the hostile scientist is 
“the hypothesis of the universal reign of law.” But 
its blow falls upon the impenetrable shield of evi- 
dence both from history and experience, a portion 
of which we try to bring to light in the remainder 
of this book. The ‘hypothesis’ confronts tremen- 
dous facts from an array of credible witnesses. The 
“hypothesis” again, as in Hume’s days, begs the 


38 EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY 


question. The testimony of the witnesses allied 
with the Divine Existence and the cravings of lost 
men, the character of Jesus, the fulfilment of 
prophecy, the monuments of those ages, scientifically 
applied to the ‘“‘hypothesis,” overbalance it. Prof. 
Paulsen has no more power against this tangible 
proof than had David Hume or Baruch de Spinoza. 


EARLY OPPONENTS 


‘The history of opinions about miracles must be 
startling to those who deny the miracles of Scrip- 
ture. Ihe nearer we approach the century in which 
Jesus lived, the less denial do we find. The Jews 
all believed that the Old Testament miracles were 
genuine works of God; and not being able to deny 
the facts of Jesus’ miracles, they ascribed them to 
diabolical influences.’ Later Jewish writers have af- | 
firmed that Christ possessed, by fraud, the secret 
and infallible name of Deity, and thereby wrought 
His miracles. | 

‘‘Celsus, the first great opponent of Christianity, 
ascribed the Christian miracles to magic. He does 
not deny them. Julian the Emperor admits that 
Paul worked miracles, and ascribes them to a super- 
ior knowledge of nature. 

‘These are the most noted opponents of Chris- 
tianity before the year 363 A. D. If the fact of the 


1 Matt. 12:24; Mark 3:22-27. 





MIRACLES 39 


miracles could have been denied would they have 
admitted it?” 


PRESUMPTION AGAINST MIRACLES REMOVED 


From these considerations we draw the conclusion 
that instead of an antecedent presumption against 
miracles, there is enough presumption for them, both 
as to their possibility and probability, to remove all 
a priori objections, and place them upon the basis 
of any ordinary historical fact, capable of being evi- 
denced by historical proof. 


1 Pres. W. H. Campbell’s lecture, 1883. 


CHAPTER IV 


PROOF OF MIRACLES FROM 
COMMON GROUND 


THE COMMON GROUND 


No competent critic will question that Paul wrote 
certain epistles. Romans, First and Second Corin-— 
thians and Galatians are accepted as genuine Paul- 
ine writings even by those who deny the credibility 
of miracles. Hence then, in these epistles we all can 
stand upon a common ground: and must accept con- 
clusions drawn logically from them. a 


PAUL’S MIRACLES IN ROMANS 


In Romans 15:18, 19, Paul writes: “For I will 
not dare to speak of any things save those which 
Christ wrought through me, for the obedience of 
the Gentiles, by word and deed, in the power of 
signs and wonders, in the power of the Holy Ghost.”’ 
The signs and wonders, according to all New Testa- 
ment usage, were miracles.’ Paul will speak only of 
those things which were proved to be of God 
through his miracles. In other words, Paul risked 


1 See Meyer on this passage. 


PROOF FROM COMMON GROUND 41 


his whole religious system on the fact of his mira- 
cles. Now these Romans had never met him, up to 
this time, in their capacity as a church; yet such 
is Paul’s confidence in the evidence of his miracles, 
that he attests his Gospel by them. These Roman 
Jews and Gentiles were a metropolitan people, not 
easily deluded. No treatise of antiquity possesses 
more depth of thought and keenness of logic than 
the epistle addressed to these people. They were . 
credited by Paul with an earnest reasonableness 
that commands admiration. Would Paul dare to as- 
sert his miracles to such a society if such miracles 
were not above all question? 

In Second Corinthians 12:12 Paul writes: ‘“Truly 
the signs of an apostle were wrought among you in 
all patience, by signs and wonders and mighty 
works.” Here he plainly calls the Corinthians to 
witness that he worked miracles among them. If 
ever a reformer, spreading a new doctrine, was 
put to the test, such a one was Paul at Corinth. His 
hearers were the former ruler of the Synagogue, 
Crispus, a Jew, who gave up his dearest idol, his 
old faith, to embrace Christianity, Sosthenes, also a 
synagogue-ruler, and Erastus the city-chamberlain, a 
high official. Though not many of the wise and no- 
ble, in a worldly sense, were called, still the Corin- 
thian Church was an enlightened and intellectual 
community. Would Paul have dared to write them 
such words as we quote above, claiming to have 


42 EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY 


wrought miracles, if all had not been absolutely con- 
vinced that the claim was valid? Paul’s ability as 
an apostle was questioned in Corinth, judging from 
his epistle, by Judaizers who sought thus to under- 
mine his authority. In the face of this he asserts 
with perfect confidence that he had worked miracles 
of which they were witnesses. This documentary 
evidence is tantamount to the testimony of the en- 
tire Corinthian Church that Paul worked miracles. 


COMMON GROUND IN THE WORDS OF JESUS 


Even such a rationalist as Ernest Renan agrees 
that some of the words of Jesus and others as 
quoted by the Gospel writers are genuine: Accord- 
ing to this theory Renan admits that Jesus’ relatives 
once said to Him: ‘Depart hence and go into Judea, 
that thy disciples also may see the works that thou 
doest.”’ If these words are genuine how can we 
refuse the conclusion that Jesus and His relatives 
agreed that He could do these works? Again, Renan 
says, ‘Others, without being blamed by the dis- 
ciples, took Him for John the Baptist risen from 
the dead, for Elias, for Jeremiah,” etc. How was 
it possible for this opinion to prevail without 
miracles? ‘The discourse on the ‘‘bread which 
cometh down from Heaven,” which Renan admits, 
is intelligible only in view of the miracle of the 
loaves and fishes. In his “Life of Jesus,’ Renan 


PROOF FROM COMMON GROUND 43 


assails the miracle of the raising of Lazarus, and 
accounts for its origin as follows: ‘ ‘If one was 
raised from the dead perhaps the living would re- 
pent,’ was no doubt the remark made by the pious 
sisters. ‘No,’ was the response of Jesus, ‘even 
though one rose from the dead they would not be 
persuaded’; recalling next a story which was 
familiar to him, that of the pious beggar covered 
with sores, who died and was carried by angels to 
Abraham’s bosom. ‘Even should Lazarus return,’ 
he might have added, ‘they would not be per- 
suaded.’ Later on this subject was treated with 
singular levity. The hypothesis became a fact.’ 
Let it be said here, that Renan impeaches Jesus 
and makes Him a party to a fraudulent story. ‘His 
conscience, through a fault of the people and not 
his own, had lost somewhat of its primordial sin- 
cerity.’’ Renan is obliged to assume that the people 
believed in the fact of the raising of Lazarus. 
Well, this is all that we ask. The attempt to con- 
struct the story out of the parable of Dives and 
Lazarus would be amusing were it not also sadden- 
ing to witness the puerile extremity to which those 
who would naturalize the miracles of Jesus are 
driven. If the people in Jerusalem, including Je- 
sus’ enemies and bitterest foes, who were plotting 
His death, believed this testimony, that Jesus raised 
Lazarus, while the living subject of the miracle was 


1 Renan’s Life of Jesus—Ch. 23. 


44 EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY 


but fifteen furlongs off, who can doubt the evi- 
dence? 


PRESENT-DAY MIRACLES 


The discussion of the miracles alleged to have 
been wrought in the Middle Ages and also in more 
recent times has been used as a foil to discredit 
the Bible miracles." We notice this in passing, al- 
though it does not strictly belong to our argument. 
The miracles of Scripture were wrought in an age 
when other miracles were claimed by some writers 
who contradict Christianity. But these other so- 
called miracles are clearly distinguished from those 
of sacred writ. ‘Hence, as we must expect counter- 
feits after the genuine has been issued, so we must 
expect these medieval and modern claims to mir-— 
acles. 

But all miracles must submit to test. Jesus asked 
His enemies to judge His works. Are these alleged 
post-scripture miracles able to stand the test? Are 
they wrought to substantiate a revelation from God, 
which will bear recording, and stand as the accepted 
Word of God to men? Since Jesus through His dis- - 
ciples has given the entire Gospel, ‘the power of God 
unto salvation to everyone that believeth,” and has 
confirmed it all by means of miracles, are any more 
miracles necessary? Are not these superfluous? 


1 Paulsen’s Ethics—p. 335. 


PROOF FROM COMMON GROUND 45 


Even those which have been wrought, as is alleged, 
by pious Christians, add nothing to Revelation. We 
claim the regeneration of the soul as a miracle, but 
this is wrought by the Holy Spirit. That God will 
work miracles in the consummation of the ages, we 
truly believe. But until our Lord comes again, in 
view of the power of the Gospel, we cannot accept 
even the need of miracles. 


CHAPTER V 


THE AUTHENTICITY OF THE OLD 
TESTAMENT 


USE OF TERMS 


THERE being no fixed terminology among the 
teachers of Evidences of Christianity, we have set- 
tled upon the following usage for this book: The 
genuineness of a book means that it was written 
by the author to whom it is ascribed in the canon of 
Scripture. Authenticity means that the subject- 
matter of the book is true and in accordance with 
fact. Credibility is applied to the writers and their 
witnesses, and means that they are trustworthy and 
competent. Credibility is sometimes applied to the 
testimony; if so used, it will be so indicated. Jn- 
tegrity means that the book as it appears in the 
canon of scripture, is substantially the same as the 
original document. 


PRESERVATION 


The authenticity of the Old Testament rests upon 
most substantial grounds. The books of the Jewish 
people were written for a people of highest intelli- 


2 a _——— 


THE AUTHENTICITY OF THE OLD TESTAMENT 47 


gence and universal literacy. Nearly all of these 
books were composed in the light of public accept- 
ance of their facts. [hese statements were sub- 
jected to the most searching criticism in literary, 
governmental and religious circles. Only the truth 
could survive. Defeats, failures, national shame and 
sin were freely recorded. ‘This is true of no other 
national record. 

Then, the preservation and copying of these books 
were sacred duties, committed to most trustworthy 
men. Absolute accuracy of copy was demanded. 
There was very slight possibility of mistake and no 
possibility of fraud. Hebrew historical books that 
were accepted as ‘Scriptures’ have an authenticity 
that challenges all literature. 


FORMERLY UNCORROBORATED 


“Until very recently the greater part of Old 
Testament history stood alone.’” Formerly the his- 
torical statements of the Old Testament were be- 
lieved because they were Biblical. ‘The Bible evi- 
denced itself as the Word of God, produced effects 
like those of no other books, and declared itself to 
be given by inspiration; therefore the believing mind 
accepted its historical statements as true. 

But this history was almost entirely uncorrobo- 
rated. Josephus wrote as he read from Scripture 


1 Dr. H. A. Sayce, in Homiletic Review. 


48 EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY 


and cognate Jewish books, and therefore adds no 


weight to their testimony.. Herodotus, the ‘‘Father 
of History,” died about 400 B. C. He wrote the 
history of the Greco-Persian wars, and being the 
first philosophical historian, traced the causes of this 
struggle backward, and thus gives an account of the 
history of the world. This is not given as accurate 
history but as a substratum for his own work. He 
begins accurate history where the Hebrew historians 
left off. All the traditions found in the Greek 
classics commenced when the Greeks were brought 


into contact with the Asiatic nations. ‘They neither 


helped nor hindered to any extent the trustworthi- 
ness of the Hebrew narratives. 


RISE OF HIGHER CRITICISM 


Intense study of the Scriptures, without the fel- 
lowship of spiritual life accompanying it, produced 
Jewish Rabbinism in Jesus’ day; likewise the critical 
investigation of the books of the Old Testament, 
and the endeavor to reconstruct its history and the 
origin of the individual books in harmony with the 
theory of evolution, have produced Higher Criti- 
cism. 

No literature corroborated the historical state- 
ments of Scripture; therefore the principles of 
criticism were at liberty to be employed in the rear- 
rangement or destruction of Old Testament his- 


a 


> _—— 


THE AUTHENTICITY OF THE OLD TESTAMENT 49 


tory. Many of the narratives were called legends 
with no historical validity. Others were labeled 
pious frauds, invented by good men in the interest 
of their religion. Moses was declared incapable of 
writing the Pentateuch; and the histories of Samuel 
were pronounced full of errors. 

‘False in one, false in all,’’ has ever been the cry 
of the hostile critic; and however illogically this for- 
mula has been applied to the Old Testament, the fact 
remains that the common mind of Christendom feels 
the shock of every denial of accuracy to the Word 
of God. If the Bible is false in its histories, the 
truth-loving mind will ever be baffled in reconciling 
this fact with the claim that inspired men wrote it. 


RISE OF ARCHAEOLOGY 


When hostile criticism had done its worst, ar- 
cheology came forward; and with gigantic strides 
and sweeping blows cleared the field of the foe, and 
showed us once more the citadel of Christian faith 
uninjured. Archeology does not take the place of 
Old ‘Testament history, but corroborates some of its 
most important statements. It corrects misappre- 
hensions, silences the fire of hostile criticism, and 
leads us logically to assume with confidence that all 
its history is correct. 

Archeology has given to the Old Testament an 
historical setting that was unknown to the Higher 


50 EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY 


Criticism of the generation of the Wellhausen 
School. All the text books on Ancient History that 
have any standing have been rewritten in the setting 
of monumental evidence. Archeology has recon- 
structed all of this history. The absolute historical 
date has been set far back of any that was known to 
the Higher Critics of twenty years ago. ‘he corrob- 
orative effect of this reconstruction upon Old Tes- 
tament History is remarkable. ‘The contribution 
which archeology makes to this subject is that 
wherever it has been possible to test the statements 
of scripture in its multitudinous historical notices 
and its other references to fact, the Bible has been 
found correct to a remarkable degree, and that, in 
its present form, and even in minute peculiarities of 
statement.’” PMY od 

In 1887, at Tel el Amarna, Egypt, a deposit of 
clay tablets was found inscribed with cuneiform 
characters. Previous advance in the study of cunei- 
form letters had prepared scholars capable of read- 
ing the tablets with comparative accuracy. [he study 
of the ancient languages of the nations of the Nile 
valley and of the Mesopotamian bed had become a 
recognized branch of Old ‘Testament learning. These 
tablets proved, upon examination, to be letters sent 
to the government of Egypt by the kings of Baby- 
lonia, Assyria, Canaan, Cappadocia, and from chiefs 
of the nomadic tribes of Arabia. These letters show 


1 Kyle, “The Deciding Voice of the Monuments’—p. 61. 


THE AUTHENTICITY OF THE OLD TESTAMENT 51 


a high degree of intellectual and literary culture com- 
mon to all the people, soldiers, merchants, etc.; and 
the date being a century before the Exodus, no proof 
is wanting that Moses could have written the Pen- 
tateuch. 

MONUMENTAL VINDICATION 


Many historical statements of the Old Testament 
have been vindicated. ‘The campaign of the East- 
ern kings as recorded in Gen. 14 was treated by the 
critics as a late production and unhistorical;’ now 
all the names of these Eastern kings are found, some 
of them inscribed by themselves, and in such rela- 
tions that all the events of the campaign told by 
Moses, point to an author who knew of the early 
Mesopotamian supremacy in Palestine. Letters of 
Amraphel have’ been found by Dr. Scheil which 
were written after that king had thrown off the yoke 
of the king of Elam, “‘on the day of Kudur-Logh- 
gharmar’s defeat.” 

In Assyria, tablets have been found, giving the 
facts of history and politics in and before the times 
of Abraham. ‘Ur of the Chaldees”’ has been dis- 
covered, and in connection with its history, its monu- 
ments mention such names as Abiramu, Jacob-el, 
Joseph-el only one generation before the appear- 
ance of ‘Abram the Hebrew.” 


1 See Kuenen’s Hexateuch, Wicksteed’s trans., p. 324. 
See Dillman’s Genesis, vol. 2, pp. 32, 33. 
See Homiletic Review, March, 1897. 


nip EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY 


The genuineness and authenticity of the Book of 
Daniel have been fiercely attacked from the days of 
Porphyry the Heathen to the age of Canon Driver. 

But nearly every place in the book that has suf- 
fered from these assaults has been refortified by 
archeology. 

The historicity of Belhaeeac was denied: ‘But, 
behold, Belshazzar turns up in an inscription by his 
peed ion Nebuchadnezzar. Darius the Mede 
was denied a place in history: But lo, there is an 
inscription of a Darius who could have been only 
a Mede. | 

Driver aftirms that the musical instruments named 
in Daniel could not have been known in the Babylo- 
nian period and therefore the writer of Daniel lived 
in a later period: But now there are inscriptions in 
the Assyrian period, at least 650 B. C., in which 
these Greek musical instruments are named as in 
use in the army. 

The Porphyry-Driver criticism of Daniel becomes 
obsolete, and nearly all of the destructive criticism — 
of the Old Testament has shared its fate. We give 
these two commonly known examples of a vindicated 
Old Testament; they are only samples of a world 
of new and Bible-proving literature. 

The archeological discoveries prove the Old 
Testament to be credible even in its details. The 
objection, ‘‘False in one, false in all,” falls to the 
ground, when one by one these minute historical 


THE AUTHENTICITY OF THE OLD TESTAMENT 53 


statements are corroborated; and the time has come 
when the writers on ancient history fear to challenge 
any Old Testament statements, for what has already 
been discovered seems but an earnest of what is to 
be found. The Old Testament claims to be a reve- 
lation from God. Apart from the New Testament, 
it stands self-proved as a preparation for a greater 
revelation; and its credibility, as such, might be es- 
tablished. But this is all. that we could claim for it. 


JESUS AND THE OLD TESTAMENT 


As revelation from God to us, the Old Testament 
stands or falls with the New. If the life and teach- 
ings of Jesus are supernatural revelation, then the 
Old Testament is a living God-inspired book to us. 

Jesus continually appealed to the Old Testament 
as the inspired Scriptures that could not be broken, 
saying: “These are they which bear witness of me.” 
Because all Jews, in Jesus’ and the apostles’ times, 
believed in the Old Testament as the Word of God, 
these writings were appealed to as attestations of 
God to the religion founded by the Man of Naza- 
reth. Jesus believed the Books of the Law to be 
the writings of Moses,’ the Psalms, i.e., some of 
them, of David,’ and the prophets’ inspired of God 
to testify beforehand concerning Him. 

1 Matt. 19:8; Mark 12:26; Luke 5:14; John 1:17. 


2 Matt. 22:43; Mark 12:36. 
3 Matt. 26:56;’ Luke 18:31. 


54 EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY 


The Apostles continued in this line of testimony. 
Nearly all the apostolic sermons recorded in the 
Acts, certainly all those which were preached to 
Jews, are built upon the Old Testament. With us 
the other way of proof is stronger. We do not 
prove Jesus and His Gospel from the Old Testa- 
ment, and then prove the Old Testament from 
Jesus, which would be most illogical. But we first 
prove Jesus and His Gospel to be a miraculous reve- 
lation from God; and thus find that the Old Testa- 
ment is so interwoven into the very fabric of His 
life and teachings, that it derives its credibility as a 
‘divine book from Him. Believing in Him we must 
believe His historic and prophetic testimonies. 


HARMONY OF THE OLD AND NEW 


The Old and New Testaments are in perfect har- 
mony concerning God’s plan to save the world. The 
Old Testament prophesies a nobler dispensation.’ 
The New Testament declares that the Old Testa- 
ment ordinances were types of the New.’ 

The ethics of the New Testament rises far above 
that of the Old, but both came out of the same car- 
dinal principle. The New Testament ethics is Jove 
in brighter bloom.° 

When we consider the prophecies of the Old Tes- 


1 Tsa. 60. 
2 Heb. 6, 7, 9, 10. 
3 Deut. 6:5; Levit. 19:18. 


THE AUTHENTICITY OF THE OLD TESTAMENT 55 


tament, especially those which relate to the Messiah, 
and then read the historic proof of their fulfilment; 
when we consider the unchanged moral law of God 
in both Testaments; when we remember that the 
Olid Testament promises the salvation offered in 
the New, righteousness by faith,’ we can affirm that 
the Old Testament is in every way a credible account 
of the revelation of God to His chosen people, 
Israel, and, through Christ, to us. 


+*Gen: 15-6; Ros. 4:3, 5:1. 


CHAPTERVV! 


PRESUMPTION OF DOCUMENTS FROM 
ROMAN HISTORIANS | 


STATEMENT OF TACITUS 


ARE there any testimonies to Jesus from contem- 
poraneous writers, and what is their value? — 

Tacitus the historian was born about the middle 
of the first century. He wrote the history of Rome 
from the death of Augustus to Domitian. Account- 
ing for the burning of Rome and the charge that 
Nero did it, he says:’ ‘“To suppress this common 
rumor, Nero procured others to be accused, and in- 
flicted exquisite punishment upon those people who 
were in abhorrence for their crimes,” and were com- 
monly known by the names of Christians. ‘Chey had 
their denomination from Christus, who in the reign 
of ‘Tiberius, was put to death as a criminal by the 
procurator Pontius Pilate. This pernicious supersti- 
tion, though checked for a while, broke out again 
and spread not only over Judea, the source of this 
evil, but reached the city also.” 
1 See Furnaux on Tacitus’ Ann. xv. C. 44 


2 Their crime was not revering but Renyine the gods. They were 
also charged with infanticide, etc. 


PRESUMPTION OF DOCUMENTS Sit 


We ask with all earnestness—How could a re- 
ligion spread over Judea and at last reach Rome 
without documentary credentials? 


STATEMENT OF SUETONIUS 


Suetonius, another historian, lived in the latter 
part of the first century. Writing of the Emperor 
Claudius, 41-54, he says: “‘He banished the Jews 
from Rome who were constantly making disturb- 
ances, Chrestus being their leader.” It is well 
known that Jesus ig sometimes called “‘Chrestus”’ by 
heathen people in the early ages of the Church. 
Again, Suetonius says of Nero’s reign, 54-68: ‘“The 
Christians were punished, a sort of men of a new 
and magical superstition.” 


TESTIMONY FROM PLINY 


Pliny the Younger was born 61 A. D. In the year 
100 A. D. he was a Roman Consul. While acting 
as governor of Bithynia he wrote letters to the Em- 
peror Trajan, reporting his way of dealing with 
those who were charged with being Christians. 
Speaking of those who were guilty of this crime and 
who at the point of punishment recanted, he says: 
‘They affirmed that the whole of their fault or error, 
lay in this, that they were wont to meet together on 
a stated day, before it was light, and sing among 


1 Lardner’s Works—vol. 6. 
4 Letters of Pliny the Younger, 96, 97; Lardner, vol. 7, p. 23. 


58 EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY 


themselves alternately a hymn to Christ, as a God, 
and bind themselves by an oath, not to the commis- 
sion of any wickedness, but not to be guilty of theft, 
or robbery, or adultery, never to falsify their word, 
nor to deny a pledge committed to them, when call- 
ed upon to return it.” In reply Trajan wrote to 
Pliny not to seek them out; but if any were charged 
and proved guilty they were to be punished.’ : 


VALUE OF THIS TESTIMONY 


These testimonies from heathen historians who 
were obliged to be hostile to the rising faith, clearly 
set forth Jesus and the infant church in the historical 
light, and point to the early belief in Him as God, 
and the powerful moral principles of His religion. 
We do not require the passage from Josephus, the 
genuineness of which is so keenly disputed, to prove 
outside of the New Testament, the historicalness of 
Jesus of Nazareth. 

We gain nothing of additional historical value 
from these testimonies. ‘These historians were per- 
sonally untouched by the Gospel, and seem to regard 
it with aversion, fearing its destructive influence 
upon their Latin civilization and society; they in- 
stinctively feel that this ‘‘superstition” threatens the 
Roman Empire.” The value of this testimony to 


1 “Pliny’s Correspondence with ‘Trajan’—Hardy, p. 2106. 
4 The secret meetings of the Christians were regarded with 
suspicion that this might be another plot against the Emperor. 


PRESUMPTION OF DOCUMENTS 59 


us is, that from it we can presume documents con- 
cerning Jesus, either from Him or from His follow- 
ers. 


THE GREEK LANGUAGE AND THE JEWS 


The first century was an age of highly developed 
literature. The Greek language had become the 
medium of public and private communication, es- 
pecially in the Mediterranean countries. Its chaste 
naturalness, and its possession of the best works of 
antiquity, made it the desired acquisition of every 
cultured person. The Greek language was firmly es- 
tablished in Galilee when Jesus appeared, preaching 
His kingdom. The common people of that age and 
country could speak and read the language. ‘They 
were familiar with the Septuagint, the Greek render- 
ing of the Old Testament. Josephus, born in Jeru- 
salem in the apostolic period, 37 A. D., wrote such 
excellent Greek that Jerome calls him ‘‘Grecus 
Livius.” Jews had become the influential traders 
and bankers in the larger cities of the Empire. ‘“The 
Jews multiplied so prodigiously that the narrow 
bounds of Palestine could no longer contain them. 
They poured, therefore, their increasing numbers 
into the neighboring countries with such rapidity, 
that at the time of Christ’s birth, there was scarcely 
a province in the Empire where they were not found 
carrying on commerce and exercising other lucrative 


60 EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY 


arts.’ Such a business demanded an ability in let- 
ters, and it is not too much to say, that the Jews 
were foremost among the cultured class of the first 
century. 


A FIRST CENTURY CHRISTIAN LITERATURE 


If Jesus lived in Galilee, and gathered His disci- 
ples from there, it would be with the Greek language 
that they would go forth to spread His religion; so 
soon as they stepped outside the limits of Palestine, 
Greek would be the medium of communication. 
That Jesus lived an actual historical character is 
amply proved by these Latin historians; that His 
disciples spread His religion in the first century, 1s 
also a matter of secular history. If this be so, then 
the records of His life and teachings, and the teach- 
ings of His followers, can be presumed with hardly © 
the shadow of a doubt. ‘There must have existed a 
documentary literature, in the form of biography, 
history or epistles, embodying the facts or beliefs 
upon which these hated Christians built their faith. 
If there were no Gospels nor Epistles, the unbiased 
archeologists would wonderingly ask—‘‘Where are 
the documents of Jesus and His disciples?” 


1 Mosheim, vol. 1, p. 24. 


CHAPTER VII 


GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPEL 
ACCORDING TO JOHN 


STRUCTURE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT 


Tue New Testament consists of twenty-seven 
documents, all of which are proved to have been 
written during the first century. Of these, twenty 
were always received by the early Christian Church 
as genuine writings of apostles or apostolic men; 
and these twenty are those of most important bear- 
ing upon the miraculous life and teachings of -Jesus, 
viz.: four Gospels, thirteen Epistles of Paul, the 
Acts, First John and First Peter. The other seven 
books were doubtful to some portions of the church; 
and came into the canon after having been most 
closely examined by every possible test, and proved 
by overwhelming evidence to be worthy of a place 
in the Scriptures. 


GENUINENESS, CREDIBILITY, AND 
SUPERNATURALNESS 


Our study of these books will lead us to the fol- 
lowing conclusions: First, that these writings are 


62 EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY 


the works of the men to whom they are ascribed, © 
i.e., their genuineness. Second, that these men and 
these writings are worthy of the fullest belief, i.e., 
their credibility. Third, that the evidence which 
they present proves that Jesus Christ and His Gospel 
are supernatural and the only possible ground of 
salvation for all men in all time. 


GENUINENESS OF JOHN 


We begin with the Gospel According to John, be- 
cause it was probably the last book written, and be- 
cause it has a peculiar line of both external and in- 
ternal evidence. ‘The Fourth Gospel has been un- 
der the fire of criticism, during the last generation, 
more than any other Gospel; hence a short study in 
its genuineness will form a type of the method of 
constructive evidence for the genuineness of any 
gospel. 


IRENZEUS 


Ireneus (born 120-140, d. about 202) was a 
pupil and friend of Polycarp who was a pupil and 
friend of John the Apostle. Hence, Irenzus is a 
direct descendant, in the religious sense, of the 
Apostle; and having been reared in Asia, and having 
in his latter years served in Gaul in Europe, he is a 
man representative of the general opinion of the 


Church, East and West. Moreover, he is of the « 


GENUINENESS OF JOHN 63 


highest standing as a historian in the estimation of 
Jerome, Tertullian, Eusebius, the Gaulish Bishops 
and many others of the age succeeding him. ‘Ter- 
tullian says—“He was a diligent inquirer of all 
sorts of opinions.’* ‘The testimony of such a man 
is worthy of all acceptance unless it can be clearly 
disproved. 

Ireneus wrote clearly to set before the Church 
the fallacies of the heretical writers, and to reaffirm 
the true Johannean doctrines of Jesus Christ and the 
Gospel. He accepts beyond all dispute the Fourth 
Gospel as the genuine work of John the Apostle. 
After speaking concerning the first three, Ireneus 
says—‘‘Afterwards, John the disciple of the Lord, 
who also leaned upon His breast, he likewise pub- 
lished a Gospel while he dwelt in Ephesus in Asia.” 
‘John the disciple of the Lord, being desirous, by 
declaring the Gospel, to root out the errors that had 
been sown in the minds of men Cerinthus * * * 
he thus begins in his doctrine, which is according to 
the Gospel: ‘In the beginning was the Word.’ ” 

In the letter of Irenzus to Florinus (177 A. D.) 
he says: ‘For while I was yet a boy, I saw thee in 
Lower Asia with Polycarp, distinguishing thyself in 
the royal court, and endeavoring to gain his appro- 
bation. For I have a more vivid recollection of 
what occurred at that time, than of recent events; 
inasmuch as the experiences of childhood keeping 


1 Lardner, vol. 2, p. 166. 


64 EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY 


pace with the growth of the soul become incorporated 
with it; so that I can even describe the place where 
the blessed Polycarp used to sit and discourse. * * * 
also how he would speak of his familiar intercourse 
with John and with the rest of TOR who had seen 
the Lord.” 


SUBSEQUENT TESTIMONY 


After Ireneus came Tertullian and Clement of 
Alexandria in the second and third centuries, and 
Origen and Eusebius (who preserved the fragment 
from Irenezus) in the third and fourth, all contin- 
uing the same unqualified testimony. This testi- 
mony so carefully collected and universally received, 
was not assailed by any writer of importance until 
the close of the eighteenth century; and then by 
critics who did not possess one particle of evidence 
from any historical source, but relied wholly upon 
conjecture.’ 

Previous to the time of Ireneus, there had been 
no need of any special historical declaration that 
the Fourth Gospel was the work of the Apostle 
John. The fact was so universally received that 
no defense of it was called for. We should expect, 
however, to find quotations and versions or trans- 
lations, and with these we are amply supplied. 


1 Godet on John, vol. 1, p. 16. 


GENUINENESS OF JOHN 65 


TESTIMONY COTEMPORANEOUS WITH IRENZEUS 

Theophilus of Antioch (cotemporaneous with 
Ireneus) quotes John 1:1-3 and mentions John as 
the writer. 

The Muratorian Canon, a fragment of which re- 
mains (160-170), is a treatise on the writings which 
were read publicly in the churches. The Fourth 
Gospel is mentioned as John’s. 

Before 170 A. D. two versions of the Gospels, 
translated from the Greek, were in circulation, the 
Syriac and Latin. The Fourth Gospel, John’s Gos- 
pel, exists in both. 

Tatian (155-170 A. D.) quotes from the Fourth 
Gospel, and his Diatessaron opens with the prologue 
of John’s Gospel. 

Justin (who died 166 A. D.) quotes voluminous- 
ly from the memoirs of the apostles, and among his 
quotations are some taken directly from John’s 
Gospel: ‘Unless ye are born again, ye shall not en- 
ter into the Kingdom of Heaven.” Justin’s writings 
in fact are saturated with the peculiar theological 
teachings of John’s Gospel. 


TESTIMONY OF THE EARLIER GENERATION, 
POLYCARP 


We now go back to the generation before Irenzus. 
Three men who came out of the first century quote 
from John. Polycarp, the Apostle’s pupil, has a 
quotation from the Epistle of John. Only one letter 


66 EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY 


of Polycarp is left us, and this is very brief. But 
one direct quotation from the First Epistle of John 
proves much. In genuineness the First Epistle and 
Gospel of John stand or fall together; and a quota- 
tion by Polycarp from the Epistle proves that the 
Gospel was written by one who lived and wrote be- 
fore Polycarp.’ 


PAPIAS 


Papias was born in the first century, and wrote 
not later than 120 A. D. He reports anecdotes 
from the life of Jesus, deriving them from those 
who had been with the disciples of the Lord. From 
these sources he records what Andrew, Peter, — 
Philip, ‘Thomas, James, John and Matthew had 
said; and ‘“‘what Aristion and the Presbyter John, 
disciples of the Lord, say.’’ Only thirty lines of the | 
works of Papias are preserved by Eusebius, and 
we are not surprised that he does not quote directly 
from the Gospel, in these few lines; the chances 
are that he would not; but the order of apostolic 
names is clearly from John’s Gospel. Aristion and 
John the Presbyter were disciples of John the Apos- 
tle, and if Papias had never seen John the Apostle, 
he could have learned of these things through these 
Apostolic men whom he knew and who undoubtedly 
wrote the closing testimony in the Gospel. (See 
John 21:24.) 


1 Schaff’s Apostolic Christianity, p. 704. 


GENUINENESS OF JOHN 67 


Professor William Sanday says of this last verse 
that it is “weighty testimony to the autoptic char- 
acter of the Gospel. It is easy to see that the con- 
cluding verses are added on the occasion of its publi- 
cation by those who published it. They, as it were, 
indorse the witness which it had borne to itself.’” 


IGNATIUS 


Ignatius also came out of the first century, and 
was martyred not later than 120 A. D. John’s 
Gospel must have been but lately written and Igna- 
tius does not quote literally, but paraphrases from 
the Gospel. We quote from his seven authentic 
epistles. ‘The living water which speaks in me.’” 
“I desire the bread of God which is the flesh of Jesus 
Christ.’ Jesus is called “the door of the Father.” 
‘God come in the flesh.” These expressions cannot 
have come from any other source than John’s 
Gospel, and we are forced to the conclusion that 
the Gospels existed at the close of the first century. 
Hilgenfeld says—‘“The entire theology of the letter 
of Ignatius rests upon the Gospel of John.’ 


TESTIMONY FROM EARLY HERETICS 
Heretical writers of this age also furnish testi- 
1 Criticism of The Fourth Gospel, p. 81. 
2 John 4:10. 


3 John 6:51. 
# Godet on John, vol. 1, p. 166. 


68 EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY 


mony to the existence of the Fourth Gospel. - Valen- 
tinus, a cotemporary of Justin, lived at Rome 140 
A. D. and with his disciples built up a school of 
theology upon the Gospel of John. 

Marcion (138) uses for the basis of his cheatoae 
a mutilated Gospel of Luke, and rejects the other 
gospels, among them that of John. Basilides (120- 
128) quotes from an older writer and uses words 
and teachings from John’s Gospel. 


THE DIDACHE 


The Didache, or Teaching of the Apostles, dis- 
covered by Bryennios in 1873, is one of the oldest 
documents of the early Christian church. It was 
composed at or shortly after the beginning of the 
second century, as a manual of Christian conduct, 
and it contains twenty-three citations from ‘the 
Gospels.” Of these none are direct from John; but 
the Eucharistic service is clearly based upon the 
teachings contained in the sixth chapter of John’s 
Gospel. 


SUMMARY OF THE EXTERNAL EVIDENCE 


Summing up the evidence thus far named, we find © 
the accepted testimony, from Ireneus onward, that 
the Fourth Gospel is the writing of John the Apos- 
tle. Written to refute heresies, and with its doc- 
trines antagonized all through this age, would its 
opponents have allowed the statements of Irenzus 


GENUINENESS OF JOHN 69 


to stand undenied? ‘The only deniers of its genu- 
ineness were the Alogians of Thyatira, a heretical 
sect of the second century, who denied the Logos, 
and claimed that Cerinthus the Gnostic wrote the 
Fourth Gospel while John the Apostle lived. This 
sect is very obscure (its very existence is denied by 
some) and their testimony as recorded by Eusebius 
proves, at least, the early date of this Gospel. But 
would the Christian Church of the latter part of 
this century be content to accept the work of a well 
known heretic as a genuine gospel.’ Would the 
versions, accepted by the orthodox church, contain 
a gospel by a recognized heretic? 

Previous to Ireneus, from Tatian down to Igna- 
tius, we find quotations full and in part, their num- 
ber decreasing as we approach the first century. In 
these same writers we find at the same time a great 
mass of teaching which points to the Fourth Gospel 
as its source. 

Now these quotations, references and teachings 
compel the theory that the Fourth Gospel was origi- 
nated before the end of the first century; and this 
confirms the positive and accepted historical state- 
ment of Irenzus. 


INTERNAL EVIDENCE 


We now turn to the internal evidence for the gen- 
uineness. 


1 Fisher’s Manual, p. 66. 


70 EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY 


WHO WAS “THIS DISCIPLE ?”’ 


In John 21 :24 we read ‘This is the disciple which 
beareth witness of these things and wrote these 
things, and we know that his witness is true.”’ Thus 
from the book itself, evidence aims to identify the 
writer; and all that is left is to determine who is 

“this disciple.” 

We learn from John 21:20 that this same disci 
was the one “‘whom Jesus loved,” “which also lean- 
ed back on His breast at the supper and said ‘Lord, 
who is he that betrayeth thee?’ In John 13:23 
it is written—‘‘There was at the table reclining on 
Jesus’ bosom one of His disciples whom Jesus 
loved.” This man then is the disciple who wrote 


the book. 
WHO IS THE UNNAMED orenrinee 


All through John’s Gospel there is an unnamed 
disciple (see John 1:40, 20:2, 19:26, 21:7). He is 
the one “whom Jesus loved,’ the other disciple 
‘whom Jesus loved.’”? He is one of the seven who 
went night-fishing on Galilee, after the resurrec- 
tion. Who, of the fishermen, could the unnamed 
disciple “whom Jesus loved’ have been? All 
are named except the sons of Zebedee and two 
others of His disciples. One of these four was the 
disciple “whom Jesus loved,” and he wrote the 
book. The two other of His disciples were most 


1 See Meyer on John, vol. 2, p. 392. 


GENUINENESS OF JOHN 71 


probably ‘“‘disciples in the wider sense;’’ but the disci- 
ple whom Jesus loved was an apostle. We have 
thus confined the writer to the small group of four 
at the most. 


HE I§ IN ANOTHER GROUP 


But we can also find the disciple whom Jesus loved 
in another group in the other Gospels. In Matt. 17: 
1-13, Mark 9:2-13, Luke 9:28-36 it is said that 
Jesus took Peter, James and John and went up into 
a high mountain. ‘here He was transfigured, and 
during the descent revealed His approaching death. 
Again, when about to begin His agony in Geth- 
semane, He took with Him Peter, James and John 
(see. Matt) 26:37, Mark 14:33). “These, most 
closely attached to Jesus, His companions in His 
highest glory and deepest agony, are most surely 
the disciples whom Jesus loved. In the prologue to 
the Gospel the writer says: ‘‘And we beheld His 
glory, glory as of the only begotten from the 
Father,” which makes it still all the more probable 
that the writer was one of the three who were upon 
the mount. 


ALL ARE EXCLUDED EXCEPT JOHN 


Thus we have identified the disciple whom Jesus 
loved in two groups. Peter is excluded in the first, 
and the sons of Zebedee are common to both. James 


V2 EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY 


could not have written the Gospel for he died, the 
first apostolic martyr; and we have proved the book 
to have been written at the close of the first century. 
John then is the disciple whom Jesus loved, who 
wrote the book. 

The testimony of the writer to the smallest de- | 
tails in these events, and the spirit of the writer 
which constantly comes from the explanations and 
narrations reveal him as an eye witness, a Palestin- 
ian Jew, the closest companion of Jesus. John is 
the only possible disciple who can satisfy all this in- 
ternal investigation. ‘Thus the external and inter- 
nal testimony make the evidence for the Genuine- 
ness of John’s Gospel overwhelming. 


CHAPTER VIII 
GENUINENESS OF THE SYNOPTICS 


THE SYNOPTIC PROBLEM 


The Gospels according to Matthew, Mark and 
Luke are called the Synoptics. They possess much 
material in common, some that is peculiar to two of 
them and a considerable amount of testimony pecu- 
liar to each alone. ‘This opens the “Synoptic Prob- 
lem’’—Are they dependent, independent, or partly 
both, in their composition? Which is the oldest? 
What is the order of their composition? From 
whatever source their material was derived, we ask 
—Were these books written by the men to whom 
they are ascribed? 


JOHN PRESUMES OTHER GOSPELS 


Having proved the genuineness of John’s Gospel, 
we can assume that when John wrote, other Gospels 
by disciples of Jesus were then existing. In John 
20:30, 31 it is stated why John chose to record cer- 
tain signs that Jesus did, viz.: ‘“That ye may believe 
_ that Jesus is the Christ the Son of God.” 

We must remember that John has omitted many 


14 EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY 


miracles of Jesus’ life, e.g., the miracles surround- 
ing His birth, the temptation, the healing of lepers 
and demoniacs, the transfiguration, the ascension. We 
know from history that these miracles were believed 
in long before John wrote. Paul, in his Epistles, 
whose genuineness none disputes, assumes all these 
occurrences; and Paul must have written many years 
before John. Is it credible that John would have 
omitted them if they had not been fully and accept- 
ably recorded? 

John also says in the thirtieth verse of the same 
chapter—‘‘Many other signs therefore did Jesus in 
the presence of the disciples which are not written 
in this book.” ‘This’ is written after “book,” em- 
phasizing this book in contrast with other books. 
What are we to believe, but that disciples before 
John had written other books containing these 
“other signs,’’ which John has not recorded. 


TESTIMONY OF JUSTIN AND PAPIAS 


The historical testimony of the genuineness of © 
the Synoptics is very complete, and as we might ex- 
pect, runs back a little earlier than that of John. We 
begin with Justin Martyr and Papias, whose testi- 
monies supplement each other. The former died 
about 165, the latter about 153 A. D. 


JUSTIN MARTYR 


Justin has left us three writings, two “Apologies” 


GENUINENESS OF THE SYNOPTICS 75 


and the ‘“‘Dialogue with Trypho.” In his Dialogue 
he gives an account of his conversion from Greek 
Philosophy to Christianity. Justin was most highly 
educated, a noble and beautiful character, and at 
last laid down his life for the faith. Justin made 
use of our Gospels, quoting them as ‘‘Memorials” 
written by “‘Apostles” and their ‘‘companions.” He 
does not mention them by name, but quotes very 
largely from Matthew and Luke, and once from 
Mark. He says that these writings were “‘also 
called Gospels’? and were read in the service of the 
Christians. 

Justin was a great Apologist, but there was need 
of no defense of the genuineness of these Gospels 
from which he quotes. His line of proof is that the 
teachings of Christianity are in fulfilment of proph- 
ecy and in accord with the revelation of the Logos— 
the Son of God, and are morally pure, wholesome 
and in accord with all that is good. Justin is a most 
valuable witness. We must remember that he had 
been a Stoic and a Platonist, and had become most 
learned in these cults; that he had surrendered ab- 
solutely to the powers of Christianity and that he 
sealed his testimony with his death.’ 


PAPIAS 


Papias was Bishop of Hierapolis and a contem- 


1 See Ante-Nicene Fathers. Introduction to Justin. 


76 EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY 


porary martyr of Polycarp. Eusebius who preserves 
fragments from him speaks of him in one place as of 
“small capacity,’ in another as ‘‘most learned.” 
Whatever Eusebius may mean by this, the historical 
statements of Papias are worthy of all belief since 
they are the oral testimony of “Aristion and the 
Presbyter John’? and others of the elders.’ The 
statement ‘‘small capacity” is no doubt a reference 
to the strong Millenarianism of Papias. Papias 
says (quoted by Eusebius)—‘‘And the Presbyter 
said this: ‘Mark having become the interpreter for 
Peter, wrote down accurately whatever he remem- 
bered. It was not, however, in exact order that he 
related the sayings or deeds of Christ. For he 
neither heard the Lord nor accompanied Him. But 
afterwards, as I said, he accompanied Peter, who 
accommodated his instructions to the necessities, 
but with no intention of giving a regular narrative 
of the Lord’s sayings. Wherefore, Mark made no 
mistake in thus writing some things as he remember- 
edthem. For of one thing he took especial care, not 
to omit anything he had heard and not to put any- 
thing fictitious into the statements.’’’ Of Matthew, 
Papias says: ‘‘Matthew put together the oracles in 
the Hebrew language and each one interpreted them 
as best he could.” 

The testimony of Justin and Papias proves that 
in the first part of the second century there were 


¥ See History of Christian Church, Schaff, vol. 2, p. 694. 


GENUINENESS OF THE SYNOPTICS WE 


books called “memorials” and “oracles’’ written by 
Matthew and Mark, and that these documents were 
received as accurate accounts of the life and teach- 
ings of Jesus. 


EARLIER EPISTOLARY EVIDENCE 


The external evidence for the existence of the 
Gospel previous to the two writers mentioned 
above, consists chiefly of letters or fragments of 
them, written by church Fathers for advice and ex- 
hortation, in which no need arose for testimony con- 
cerning the composition of the Gospel. ‘These let- 
ters are valuable to our subject because of a few 
direct quotations, and their broad teaching of the 
Gospel-history and doctrine. They assume the out- 
lines of Jesus’ birth, crucifixion and resurrection. 
They echo the teachings of Jesus on the mount. 
They could not have been composed without gospels, 
written or oral, like the accepted canonical books. 


EPISTLE OF POLYCARP 


Polycarp, the pupil of John, in an epistle to the 
Philippians quotes from Matthew, Mark and Luke, 
as follows: ‘‘But remember what the Lord said, 
teaching: ‘Judge not that ye be not judged;’ ‘For- 
give and ye shall be forgiven; ‘Be ye merciful that 
ye may obtain mercy;’ ‘With what measure ye mete, 
it shall be measured to you again;’ ‘Blessed are the 


78 EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY 


poor and they that are persecuted for righteousness’ 
sake for theirs is the kingdom of God.’”’ ‘‘As the 
Lord hath said: ‘The spirit indeed is Me but 
the flesh is weak.’ ’”* 

Polycarp has many quotations from our New 
Testament, and he gives them Scriptural authority. 
These letters, and there were many of them, were 
written to churches composed of the most intelligent 
Christians, all of whom must have accepted the same 
inspired sources of the Gospel. No sane mind can 
doubt, in view of this evidence, that the New Testa- 
ment existed and was fully received before the be- 
ginning of the second century. 


THE EPISTLE OF BARNABAS 


The Epistle of Barnabas was sitieten ihe) the 
destruction of Jerusalem to those who had “‘seen so 
great signs and prodigies.” It is one of the earliest 
of the Post-Apostolic epistles. He quotes from the 
Synoptics as follows: ‘“‘He came that He might 
_ show that He came not to call the righteous but sin- 

ners to repentance;’’* “Give to everyone that ask- 
eth thee; ‘‘Let us therefore beware lest it should 
happen to us at it is written—‘There are many 
called but few are chosen.’ ”’ 


! Lardner, vol. 2, p. ror; Matt. 5:3, 7, 10; Luke 6:20, 36, 37, 
38; Mark 14:38. 

2 Epistle of Barnabas, ch. 5; Matt. 9:13; Parallel in Mark, “to 
repentance” only in Luke. 


GENUINENESS OF THE SYNOPTICS 79 


EPISTLES OF CLEMENT OF ROME 


Clement of Rome, according to Irenzus, was the 
‘“‘oupil of. an apostle.”’ ‘The accepted tradition is 
that he was third Bishop at Rome. His epistles to 
the Corinthians are proved to be genuine and were 
often accepted as apostolic documents. He uses as 
authorities the Old ‘Testament Apocrypha and 
the New Testament. He is especially familiar with 
the Epistles of Paul, of whom he speaks with great 
veneration. He quotes from Matt. 26:24, from 
Luke 17:2, from Mark 9:42. The most probable 
date of this epistle is 97 A. D., although some con- 
servative writers would place it as early as 68 A. D. 


THE DIDACHE 


This oldest church manual, to which we have al- 
luded, gives twenty-three citations from “the Gos- 
pel; of these, seventeen are from Matthew or 
Matthew and Luke. The writer claims no authority 
for himself; but gives the teachings from the Lord 
through the twelve apostles. His citations are evi- 
dently from commonly accepted writings. No oral 
Gospel can be proved by them, for five are express 
quotations from our written Gospels. The date of 
the Didache most easily maintained is from 100 to 


{AUN Wags BP 
TESTIMONY TO LUKE’S GOSPEL 
That Luke’s Gospel was in documentary form 


80 EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY 


early in the second century is certain from the use 
which Marcion, the founder of the sect which bore 
his name, made of it at Rome 140 A. D. Marcion 
had been expelled from the Christian church at 
Pontus, and going to Rome issued a gospel which 
can be nothing less than Luke’s Gospel worked over 
to suit the peculiar views of this heretic. Accord- 
ing to Marcion, the true canon of Scripture consisted 
of Luke’s Gospel, and ten Epistles of Paul. When 
Marcion wrote, the Gospel according to Luke must 
have been written, and, according to Theodoret, a 
historian of the fourth century, Marcion was not the 
originator of this heresy, one Cerdo, who “proved 
by the Gospels the just God of the old covenant and 
the good God of the new are different beings.’ 
‘Hence the predecessor of Marcion is found to be 
dependent upon Luke. 


NO EARLY DEFENCE NEEDED 


We have shown that our Synoptics were in pos- | 
session of the. generation immediately following the 
apostles themselves. Why there is no definite state- 
ment that these were genuine documents by Mat- 
thew, Mark and Luke is very evident. ‘There is no 
dispute upon the genuineness; hence the statement 
of it would not frequently be made. Why should 
Polycarp or Clement of Rome defend a point not 


1 Godet on Luke, p. 4. 


GENUINENESS OF THE SYNOPTICS 81 


yet attacked? However, as soon as a statement of 
the genuineness was needed, it was given with the 
utmost confidence and certainty of acceptance. 


IRENZUS TESTIFIES 


[reneus of Gaul, shortly after he became bishop, 
wrote a book against the numerous heresies that had 
arisen in the church. The majority of these were wild, 
irrational speculations of gnostic Christians. In 
his third book Irenzus adduces “‘proofs from the 
Scriptures,’ and in so doing, informs his readers 
how these Scriptures came into being.’ He says: 
“We have learned from none others the plan of our 
salvation than from those through whom the Gospel 
has come down to us, which they did at one time pro- 
claim in public, and, at a later period by the will of 
God, handed down to us in the Scriptures, to be the 
ground and pillar of our faith.” 

‘Matthew also issued a written gospel among the 
Hebrews in their own dialect, while Peter and Paul 
were preaching at Rome and laying the foundations 
of the church. After their departure, Mark, the 
disciple and interpreter of Peter, did also hand 
down to us in writing what had been preached by 
Peter. Luke also, the companion of Paul, recorded 
in a book the Gospel preached by him. Afterwards, 
John the disciple of the Lord, who also had leaned 


i Trenexus Adv. Her. book 3, ch. 1. 


82 EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY 


upon His breast, did himself publish a Gospel dur- 
ing his Bdente! at Ephesus in Asia.” 

Ireneus names these facts as undisputed, re- 
ceived by all, and uses them to crush his opponents 
who do not deny the genuineness of these Scriptures; 
but “turn around and accuse these same Scriptures 
as if they were not correct nor of authority—and 
that they are ambiguous, and that the truth cannot 
be extracted from them by those who are ignorant 
of tradition.” 


THE GOSPELS ARE THE ‘‘MEMORIALS”’ 


The “Gospels” of Irenzus are the ‘““Memorials” 
of Justin—a vast number of quotations in both 
proves this. The time between these two writers 
was too short to permit the rise of any other docu- 
ments without the knowledge of Irenzus. The quota- 
tions in the writers before Justin prove that they 
also had the same documents. 


SUBSEQUENT EVIDENCE 


After Ireneus, the great church-writers affirmed 
the same statements. ‘Tertullian, Clement of Alex- 
andria, Origen and Eusebius carry us up into the 
fourth century; and finally at the Council of Car- 
thage 397 A. D. the canon of the New Testament 
was finally settled, not because the Church Council 
had determined upon these books, but because all 


GENUINENESS OF THE SYNOPTICS 83 


Christendom was satisfied that these Gospels were 
genuine. 

That they were identical with what we now have 
has been made more apparent by the discovery of 
the Codex Sinaiticus, a manuscript of the middle of 
the fourth century. Thus the line of evidence is 
complete from the days of the apostles until now. 


CHAPTER [x 


NEW TESTAMENT CREDIBILITY AND 
AUTHENTICITY 


By Credibility we mean the trustworthiness of 
the narrator; by Authenticity, the truth of the nar- 
ration itself. “Chese two topics are so interdepend- 
ent that we treat them as one. | 


THE UNIVERSAL ATTESTATION 


There is no way of explaining the rise and growth 
of the Christian religion and church, except upon 
the ground that a great multitude of the best and 
most thoughtful men of the first and second cen- 
turies firmly believed that the apostles were credible 
witnesses and their testimony worthy of all belief, 
In Asia, Africa and Europe, from among Jews and 
Gentiles, from all walks and conditions of life they 
testify—‘‘We believe these men and their writings.” 
The statements made by the apostles covered events - 
which were enacted before the eyes of multitudes; 
these were living witnesses, and some of them hos- 
tile to the new faith, in whose time these books are 
proved to have been written. “These things were 
not done ina corner.” The apostles staked all their 


CREDIBILITY’ AND AUTHENTICITY 85 


reputation upon the certainty of the fact of these 
things; and thousands of cotemporaries witnessed 
by word and life that these things were so. The 
early church-fathers staked their reputation, their 
present and future happiness, their lives upon the 
credibility of the apostles.. If the latter had taught 
or written falsely, detection would have been easy 
and immediate. In that part of the world where 
the events occurred, and at that time, they preached 
and wrote with the calmness of certainty. 


CHARACTER OF THE WRITERS 


Compared with the wise philosophers and rhetori- 
cians of the heathen world, these men were babes. 
Compared with the products of these wise men of 
the world, the writings of these babes are as the 
sun to the rush-light. When we consider the Gos- 
pels in their beauty, depth and power, and then re- 
member their human authors, we stand amazed— 
the cause is inadequate to the effect. Matthew was 
a publican of Galilee, evidently in character a busi- 
ness man, a man of the world; not irreligious, but 
loving and making money until his Master called 
him, and for three years taught and then inspired 
him. Mark was a younger man, possibly a Jerusa- 
lemite, companion to Paul and Barnabas and after- 
wards to Peter. Mark had his weaknesses in the 
early part of his career, but Paul afterwards con- 


86 EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY 


sidered him “useful to me for ministering.”* Mark 
wrote the Gospel preached by Peter. ‘he integrity 
of Mark, i. e., his correct rendering of Peter’s Gos- 
pel is not questioned, being universally accepted. 
And who was Peter? A fisherman of Galilee, an 
uneducated man in the wisdom of the world, yet 
challenging his age with a message that drives all 
worldly wisdom to the wall. Luke had some cul- 
ture. He was a Greek, probably, and a physician 
—howbeit, physicians were often slaves. Luke 
wrote as Paul preached; still he had knowledge 
of Jesus from other apostles and his Gospel is his 
own testimony from eyewitnesses.” John was also 
a fisherman of Galilee. John did not make Chris- 
tianity. Christianity made John. Nothing can be, 
nothing ever was, alleged against these men that in 
the least degree weakens them as competent wit- 
nesses, and recorders of the testimony of others. 
Two of them were eyewitnesses of the facts of Je- 
sus’ life, death and resurrection; and two after the 


year 48 A. D. were companions of the foremost 


apostles. ‘Thus they, the four, represent the testi- 
mony of all the apostles. 

They had the means of having the facts. Nearly 
all histories are written by authors who obtain their 
facts from others. There is no cotemporary of 
Alexander who writes the history of the brilliant 


Y and Tim. 4:11; Acts 15:38. 
2 Luke I :1-4. 


CREDIBILITY AND AUTHENTICITY 87 


Macedonian; but who will doubt that we have a 
substantially accurate account of his career? Je- 
sus’ disciples, who were thoughtful, earnest and 
uncultured men, Jews with strong and ever prej- 
udiced feelings against any new faith which might 
conflict with that in which they had been reared, 
testify to the facts which happened in their presence. 
Some of these facts were contrary to their opinions 
and beliefs. But the disciples were the servants of 
facts. They could not but bear witness to what they 
saw and heard. Their testimony as we have viewed 
it is not the testimony of one man, but of many, 
and all agree in the essential points. We believe, 
by clear, theological proof, that the Holy Spirit 
inspired these men to record without error. Evi- 
dences, however, do not ask for this ultimate faith, 
although it paves the way for its reception. The 
reliability of the witnesses and the substantial ac- 
curacy and agreement of the testimony are all that 
we need in our argument. 


THEIR HUMILITY 


In all the testimony of the apostles we find a very 
marked humility. They claim to have originated 
nothing of their faith; but were only and always 
witnesses of their Lord. ‘They never assert their 
superiority, but offer themselves as servants to God 
and men. They have but few opinions of their 


88 EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY | 


own, and even confess that some which they form- 
erly had were erroneous. ‘They let facts speak. 
Herod the Great, Herod Antipas, Pilate, Caiaphas, 
all were guilty of great wrong towards their Mas- 
ter and His cause; yet the apostles do not use any 
denunciatory epithets when they write of them, but 
calmly state what these rulers did. John alone says 
that Judas “was a thief,’’ and says this only to ex- 
plain the reason why Judas spoke certain words at 
Bethany. Peter says, dismissing the case of Judas, 
“that he might go to his own place.’” 


THEIR CANDOR 


They candidly relate things discreditable to them- 
selves. They childishly contend among themselves — 
which should be the greatest.* Even at the last sup-. 
per this controversy again arose.* They testify to 
their own unbelief or little faith,’ their hardness of 
heart,® their ignorance,’ their cowardice. Peter, 
through Mark, relates his shameful rebuke and 
fail’ 

Such men are generally accepted as honest wit- 
nesses. If they had related ordinary events betray- 
ing such a character as we have shown them to pos- 
sess, no one would ever doubt their testimony. But 
we have shown that the extraordinary events, to 
VY John 12:6. 4 Luke 22:24. 7 Matt. 15:16. 


2 Acts 1:25. 5 Matt. 17:20. 8 Mark 14:50. 
3 Mark 9:34. 6 Mark 6:52. 9 Mark 8:33, 14:66-72. 





CREDIBILITY AND AUTHENTICITY 89 


which they bear witness, are credible in the light 
of what the religion of Jesus is, does and claims to 
be able to do. Other men in other times have testi- 
fied to miracles, but those to which the disciples of 
Jesus testify stand out in their moral cause and 
effect as the morality of Jesus towers above all 
others. There is adequate cause for both these 
miracles and this morality. If the events to which 
the disciples testify did not happen, what did hap- 
pen that Christianity should arise? 


DECEIVERS, DECEIVED OR HONEST MEN WITH FACTS 


We have shown that the apostles cannot be 
charged with deception. The standard of morality 
which they teach would suffice alone to make such 
a charge absurd. 

Nor can they have been deceived. ‘There were 
too many of them to be victims of a plot such as 
this theory would assume. So many men of hard 
sense could not have been the subjects of a hallucina- 
tion such as the Gospel miracles would demand. 
Miracles began at a certain time and then stopped. 
They were not always wrought, Jesus guards His 
followers against overestimation of miracles. The 
report of them is sometimes suppressed. Middle- 
age miracles are in line with prevailing belief. 
Apostolic miracles are against the prevailing faith. 


90 EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY 


The mythical theory of the last century has gone 
to pieces against these considerations.’ 

These apostles sealed their testimony with their 
death. This was a forecast of their Master. They 
relate it. ‘They believe it. Still onward they go, 
joyful to suffer in His cause who died for them. 
On the other hand they avoid death whenever pos- 
sible.2, Such men are not wild enthusiasts, but calm, 
convinced, credible witnesses to authentic events. 


HARMONY 


The four Gospels are four stories of one biog- 
raphy. They are by four writers each of whom had 
a different reason for writing. This, then, must 
follow—Agreement in all essential points, with dif- 
ference in details. Four witnesses with this kind 
of testimony would make the strongest kind of a 
law-case. It disproves collusion between the wit- 
nesses, It proves the certainty of the essential 
points. Nearly all the so-called discrepancies in the 
four Gospels can be resolved into a case in which 
both or all the details are possible. Such is the 
nature of the testimony of the apostles. To sum 
up—the apostles have almost universal attestation. 
They were true, unsophisticated men. ‘They had 
the means of having the facts. They were humble, 
candid witnesses. They evidence that they were 


!¥ See Fisher’s Manual, p. 74. 
2 Acts 12:17. 


CREDIBILITY AND AUTHENTICITY 91 


neither deceivers nor deceived. ‘They surrendered 
all and died for their testimony. Their witnessing 


agrees. Therefore they are credible and their nar- 
rations are authentic. 


CHAPTER X 
CHARACTER OF JESUS 


From the four Gospels the world has derived 
the character of Jesus. In truth it may well be 
said—‘‘His character stands as the central orb of 
the system, and without it there would be no effec- 
tual light and no heat.’? The truth of deductive 
logic does not rest upon the character of Aristotle, 
nor the philosophy of the pure reason upon the 
character of Kant; but Christianity rests upon the 
character of Jesus. He claims our love and offers 
Himself as its object. He is a living embodiment | 
of all that He taught. 


A MANY-SIDED CHARACTER 


The character of Jesus is like a great jewel; from 
many faces the glory sparkles. His character, if 
viewed from the negative side, presents no oppor- 
tunity for moral criticism. He did nothing for 
which He can be reproached, and at the same time 
He neglected nothing which He ought, morally, to 
have done. He was free from even the excusable 


1 Mark Hopkins, Lowell Lectures, p. 212. 


CHARACTER OF JESUS 93 


customs of His day, which some might regard as 
compromising. In all His relationship with men, 
women, society, the state, the church, He is abso- 
lutely free from any word or deed which might have 
injured a good name. He challenges His enemies 
to convict Him of sin,’ and this in the midst of His 
most hostile surroundings. If the opponents of 
Christianity could have successfully assailed the 
character of Jesus, the apostolic age would have 
witnessed the destruction of the rising faith. 


HUXLEY AND THE GADARENE SWINE 


Professor Thomas Huxley has found a flaw in 
the character of Jesus as presented by the Gospel 
writers.” ‘Everything that I know of law convinces 
me that the wanton destruction of other people’s 
property is a misdemeanor of evil example.” Hux- 
ley, of course, does not believe that evil spirits are 
able to pass from men into swine. ‘“The choice 
then lies betweeen discrediting those who compiled 
the Gospel biographies and disbelieving the Master, 
whom they, simple souls, thought to honor by pre- 
serving such tradition of the exercise of His author- 
ity over Satan’s invisible world.” ‘This is the 
dilemma.” 

We are concerned with the moral issue alone. 


¥ John 8:46. 
2 See Mark 5, and Huxley’s Science and Christian Tradition, 
p. 370. 


94 EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY 


The New Testament writers agree that demons are 
moral agents, possessing a measure of freedom. 
The demons request Jesus that they shall be per- 
mitted to enter into the swine (according to all 
these writers). Jesus has exercised His ‘‘all author- 
ity’ in commanding them to depart from the man. 
Going out from the man they are again given their 
freedom, and are responsible for all the conse- 
quences. The permission on the part of Jesus must 
fall into the category of all permissive decrees. The 
moral freedom of the agent who commits the deed, 
under permission, determines who is to blame. 


POSITIVE WITNESS 


Viewed from the positive side, the character of 
Jesus is still more wonderful. Even those who do 
not believe in His divinity admit that His character 
is one of the greatest moral elevation. 

Spinoza speaks of Christ as the symbol of divine 
wisdom, and attributes to Him an immediate intui- 
tion of God. 

Goethe says: “I esteem the Gospels to be thor- 
oughly genuine, for there shines forth from them 
the reflected splendor of a sublimity, proceeding 
from the person of Jesus Christ, and of as divine 
a kind as was ever manifested upon earth.” 

The skeptical Rousseau asks, ‘‘Can the Person 
whose history the Gospels relate be Himself a man? 


CHARACTER OF JESUS 95 


What sweetness, what purity in His manners! What 
affecting goodness in His instructions! What sub- 
limity in His maxims! What profound wisdom in 
His discourses! What presence of mind, what in- 
genuity of justice in His replies! Yes, if the life 
and death of Socrates are those of a philosopher, 
the life and death of Jesus Christ are those of a 
God.” 

Strauss speaks of Christ as ‘‘the highest object 
we can possibly imagine with respect to religion, the 
Being without whose presence in the mind perfect 
piety is impossible.” 

W. E. H. Lecky, in his ‘History of European 
Morals,” says of Christ: ‘The simple record of 
three short years of active life has done more to 
regenerate and soften mankind than all the dis- 
quisitions of philosophers and than all the exhorta- 
tions of moralists. ‘This has indeed been a well- 
spring of whatever has been best and purest in the 
Christian life.” 

Jesus was a man of ideal ethical type, suitable 
to any age. He was a member of the society of 
His day; He was no recluse; and yet was as far 
removed from other men as our moral imagination 
can reach. In any age this would have been true— 
is true today. Jesus always has stood, still stands, 
alone. He was deeply pious and reverent toward 
God, His Father; and at the same time filled with 
an abounding love and loyalty toward sinful men. 


96 EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY 


He was true to His own mission; and yet so un- 
selfish that the interest of all men was served by 
Him, to the utter sacrifice of Himself. His purity 
was combined with the utmost tenderness and com- 
passion. Even in His stern severity, which at times 
was called forth by the hypocrisy of His enemies, 
He was great and righteous. It was anger without 
passion, and ever ready to turn into tender forgive- 
ness. He could be sinned against while at the same 
time a sin against the Holy Spirit could not be for- 
given. 


NO SELF-REPROACH 


Jesus never prayed that His sins might be for- 
given. He never repented. Regret for past deeds 
never came from His lips. He was conscious that 
He was doing God’s will. He kept His Father’s © 
commandments.” Even in His last days when the 
darkness of the dreadful scenes of His agony be- 
gan to close around Him, and on into the unutter- 
able torture of soul and body, with His disciples 
fled and all the world against Him, there is no self- 
reproach. No word nor deed betrayed penitence - 
on His part. ‘There is but one conclusion. The dis- 
ciples accepted Jesus as morally perfect. They do 
not apply to Jesus nor to His character in the Gos- 
pels, such terms of commendation as we have used. 


! Mark 3:20. 
2 John 15:10. 


CHARACTER OF JESUS 97 


They simply record facts, facts with no comments. 
They publish this character as witnesses to His 
words and deeds. 


THIS CHARACTER IS A MIRACLE 


This fact then confronts us. Jesus left the im- 
pression upon His followers that He was sinless. 
Then either of two explanations must be true: Je- 
sus was and did as they, the disciples, record, or 
they, by conspiracy or innocently, invented this sin- 
less character, and that by actual deed and life. 
If the former is true, Jesus is a miracle. If the lat- 
ter is true, these Galileans, whether by fraud or in 
innocence, have performed a miracle. If we must 
assume a miracle, the former is by far the simpler 
and more acceptable to the rational mind. It can 
be shown that the latter is the effect; the former is 
the cause. The testimony of the witnesses, who 
could invent such a life as that of Jesus, that they 
saw and heard Him do and say these things, is a 
moral impossibility; for it would make them, while 
holding and recording perfect moral ideals and in 
practical form, the very basest of men, the grossest 
of deceivers. ‘he hypothesis of invention is self- 
destructive. The miraculous character of Jesus 
must have been a reality.' 


1! See Row’s Manual of Christian Evidence, p. 81. 


98 EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY 


THE SON OF GOD 


This man of the purest and noblest character 
declared that He was the supernatural Messiah, 
the Son of God.' For this declaration He was 
crucified. He had attested it by miracles. He 
further proved it, as we shall see by His resurrec- 
tion. Some Christian Evidences seem to shrink 
from this final conclusion. Why should we? The 
evidence is in our hands. He raises the dead; He 
arose from the dead; His character is perfect; He 
must be believed in all things, or perfect moral 
purity and divine demonstration are < Volnpataes with 
the grossest deception. 

Renan, notwithstanding his opposition to the be- 
lief in miracles, admits the logical conclusion that 
Jesus is divine. 

Renan’s estimate in his “Life of Jesus” is very 
emphatic: ‘“‘Jesus is in every respect unique, and 
nothing can be compared with Him. Be the un- 
looked for phenomena of the future what they may, 
Jesus will not be surpassed. Noble Initiator re- 
pose now in Thy glory! ‘Thy work is finished, Thy 
divinity established. A thousand times more living, 
a thousand times more loved since Thy death than 
during Thy course here below, Thou shalt become 
the corner stone of humanity, insomuch that to tear 
Thy name from this world would be to shake it 
to its very foundation. No more shall men dis- 
tinguish between Thee and God.” 

1 Matt. 26:64. 





CHAPTER XI 


AUTHENTICITY OF THE RESURREC- 
TION OF JESUS 


HAVING established the genuineness of the Gos- 
pels, and the credibility of their writers, we now 
proceed to the authenticity of the account of the 
resurrection of Jesus. ‘This is the central miracle 
of the New Testament; and being also the key to 
all that followed in the rise of Christianity, it ought 
to be subjected to the keenest light and the strong- 
est tests possible. We offer it in evidence as the 
crowning point of the argument, and are willing 
to stand or fall with it. ‘‘And if Christ hath not 
been raised, then is our preaching vain, your faith 
also is vain.’” 


HUME’S TEST OF A MIRACLE 


The modern attack upon miracles is nothing new, 
it is a revival of Hume’s old assault, not with philo- 
sophic but with scientific weapons. ‘The following 
is Hume’s verdict: ‘‘There is not to be found, in 
all history, any miracle attested by a sufficient num- 


F gst, Cor! 15:14 


100 EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY 


ber of men, of such unquestioned goodness, educa- 
tion and learning as to secure us against all delusion 
in themselves; of such undoubted integrity as to 
place them beyond all suspicion of any design to 
deceive others; of such credit and reputation in the 
eyes of mankind as to have a great deal to lose, 
in case of their being detected in any falsehood; 
and at the same time attesting facts, performed in 
such a public manner, and in so celebrated a part of 
the world, as to render the detection unavoidable. 
All such circumstances are requisite to give us a full 
assurance in the testimony of men.’ This text was 
also adopted by Professor Huxley in his celebrated 
controversy with Mr. Gladstone.’ 

It is our purpose, not only to accept this test, but 
also to present the positive evidence for the ritrafele 
of the resurrection of Jesus along these very lines. 
This properly belongs to credibility of the writers, 
but we have adopted it as common ground with an 
opponent in the discussion of the resurrection. 


IMPORTANCE 


Both the enemies and friends of Jesus regarded 
the resurrection as the most important fact of His 
history. The former saw in it the danger of a 
mighty revolution in religion, hence they attacked 
it. ‘he latter discovered it, and found it the guar- 


! Huxley’s Science and Christian Tradition, p. 207. 


AUTHENTICITY OF THE RESURRECTION 101 


antee of their immortality and the very pillar and 
ground of their faith; hence the abundance of tes- 
timony that clusters around it. The Elders of the 
Jews circulated the report, through the soldiers who 
had guarded the tomb, that “His disciples came by 
night and stole Him away while we slept.’”* Only 
men who had been asleep during the theft could 
have offered such testimony. Celsus, the great op- 
ponent of Christianity in the second century, sug- 
gested the vision-hypothesis, a theory explaining the 
resurrection on the ground of self-deception. This 
has been revised in the nineteenth century under 
various forms. Every foe of supernatural Chris- 
tianity in all the ages has recognized that to over- 
throw the resurrection of Jesus is to destroy all 
faith in His miracles. 

On the other hand, the apostles and their follow- 
ers staked all their claim to veracity upon the resur- 
rection. ‘They were willing to be found false wit- 
nesses if Christ had not arisen. They preached 
“Jesus and the resurrection.” ‘Their whole doc- 
trine of redemption was linked with the resurrec- 
tion. All depended upon it; hence we should ex- 
pect it to be guarded as a great, sacred truth, and 
offered for the closest and most critical inspection. 
The resurrection was held up before a doubting na- 
tion and an indifferent world; and the result was 


t Matt. 28:13. 


102 EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY 


the disintegration of the one and the conquest of 
the other. 


JESUS’ DEATH 


That Jesus actually died is established by heathen 
testimony. ‘Tacitus would not have accepted the his- 
torical fact if it had not been a matter of record or 
of universal belief. “The centurion at the cross saw 
that He ‘‘gave up the ghost.’” It was the business 
of the soldier to see that the criminal died. “Pilate 
marveled that He was already dead,” but the centu- 
rion assured him. Joseph of Arimathza as well as 
Nicodemus, a member of the council, knew that Jesus 
was dead. To make doubly sure, one of the soldiers 
thrust his spear into Jesus’ side, and blood and water 
came out, testifying to a hemorrhage from the 
heart-cavity. 


THE BURIAL AND WATCH 


Two men, both of the highest standing and integ- 
rity among the Jews, laid the body of Jesus in the 
tomb. The disciples were scattered. John had 
taken the mother of Jesus to his house. Only the 
women beheld where the body was laid. 

No Jew would touch a dead body on the great 
sacred day which followed. None ever suspected 
that it was taken away at that time. The Elders 
bribed the guard to say that the disciples stole away 


¥ See Mark 15:30. 


AUTHENTICITY OF THE RESURRECTION, 103 


the body while they slept (i.e., slept on guard), and 
offered to “persuade the governor,” if it should 
come to his ears. If they could have offered the ex- 
cuse that the disciples did the deed before the guard 
went to the tomb, it would have relieved the soldiers 
of all danger and would have made the bribe un- 
necessary. 

On the next day’ after the crucifixion, this guard 
was placed at the tomb, at the request of certain 
members of the priests and Pharisees. “The tomb 
was “made sure, sealing the stone, the guard being 
with them.’” ‘These ‘‘attesting facts’’ settle the cer- 
tainty of the death, burial and safe-keeping of the 
body of Jesus. [he witnesses who are cited are 
enough to prove any other event. Their goodness, 
education, integrity and freedom from design are 
unquestioned. Joseph of Arimathea and Nicode- 
mus lived to hear the resurrection become the most 
discussed question in Jerusalem. If the Jews had 
the body they would have produced it, and over- 
thrown the growing faith. ‘The disciples were in- 
capable of stealing the body under the circum- 
stances; and their testimony that they saw Him alive 
and the peculiar manner in which they saw Him, 
make the story of the body-snatching an absurdity. 
If they had been deceivers, and had stolen the body, 
which afterwards they claimed came to life, would 


! The next day began at sunset. 
2 Matt. 27 :66. 


104 EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY © 


such men have left themselves out of the transac- 
tion? It would have been their glory to claim that 
God had so worked a miracle through them. 


THE FOUR ACCOUNTS 


The statements of the four evangelists are a won- 
derful illustration of unity of evidence through di- 
versity of detail. ‘If there had been an exact agree- 
ment about everything, in time, place and expression, 
few would have believed them; the agreement would 
then have been ascribed to human contrivance, and 
because they had concerted matters together before- 
hand.” So says Chrysostom. If the accounts of the 
resurrection were an invention, how could such dif- 
ferent details ever have been invented? 


But viewing all, one can make an account, which, — 


while not a perfect harmony of the recorded events, 
at least gives a satisfactory succession, including all 
the statements. 


THE EMPTY TOMB 


The Hebrew day began and ended with sunset. 


Jesus was in the tomb from Friday before sunset, — 


until Sunday morning sometime before daylight. ‘A 
day and a night” in expression is the same as a day, 
and a part of a day is often called a day." 

Very early on the third day, the first day of the 


! Robinson’s Harmony, p. 171. 


a ——— 


—— ~~ 


\ 
AUTHENTICITY OF THE RESURRECTION 105 


week, the women came first to the tomb, having the 
spices with which to anoint the body of their Lord.’ 
Mary Magdalene may have run ahead, and seeing 
the tomb open, hastened to tell the disciples. The 
other women coming up find the open tomb with no 
body in it; as they stand amazed, the two angels an- 
nounce the resurrection of Jesus. The women then 
go away. Next Peter and John come running to the 
tomb, followed by the weeping Mary who thinks 
that her Lord has been stolen. Peter and John 
enter the tomb and see evidence in the condition of 
the grave-clothes and the napkin that the body has 
not been stolen. ‘They depart, wondering. Who 
can doubt that John’s testimony is that of an eye- 
witness, when he says that he outran Peter, and that 
he was obliged to stoop down, and that Peter went 
in first? 


FIRST-DAY APPEARANCES 


After they had gone, Mary remains weeping, and 
Jesus appears unto her. This is a possible arrange- 
ment if we conclude to accept Mark 16:9. 

The other appearances on the first day fall into 
place as follows: 
2—To the women returning from the tomb.—Mat- 

thew. 


1 See Matt. 28, Mark 16:2, Luke 24, John 20. Robinson’s Har- 
mony, p. 199. 


106 EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY — 


3——To Peter later in the day, reported also by Paul. 
—Luke. 

4—To the two disciples on the road to Emmaus. — 
Luke, Mark. 

5—To the ten in the evening, alao by Paul.—Mark, 
Luke, John. 


APPEARANCES AFTER THE FIRST DAY 


6—To the eleven, eight days after the first—John. 
7—To the seven on the lake.—John. 
8—To the eleven and five hundred brethren, also by 
Paul.—Matthew. 

9—To James, reported by Paul alone. 
10—To the eleven immediately before the ascen- 
sion, by Paul.—Luke in Acts. 

We have included the testimony of Paul, that the © 
table of appearances may be complete. 


CHARACTER OF THE APPEARANCES 


We thus learn that these appearances began and 
ended abruptly. At times and places unexpected, 
except in the mount, Jesus appeared unto more than © 
the apostles, to over five hundred, according to Paul, 
whose testimony will be considered hereafter. These 
apostles testify that they did not believe. Jesus 
overcame their unbelief, They saw and touched 
Him. To prove that He was not a spirit, He ate 
fish before them. ‘These interviews were spread 


AUTHENTICITY OF THE RESURRECTION 107 


over forty days; then leaving His last commission 
with them, viz.: that they should witness these 
things unto all the nations, He ascended into a cloud. 
Myths and legends arise under far different condi- 
tions than these. If these interviews were imagin- 
ary they would have increased and not come to an 
abrupt ending. 

Here is a body of men, acknowledged to be good 
men; if not highly educated, at least possessed of 
the soundest judgment; of unimpeached integrity 
(one, Peter, tells of his own denial of his Lord) ; 
with all the facts of the case opposed to any design 
on their part; with everything to lose, their own 
souls according to their belief, if untrue in their 
statements. ‘There is also the attesting fact that 
three thousand persons in Jerusalem in one day con- 
fessed to their faith that these things were so. We 
must believe that the resurrection of Jesus is au- 
thentic history. The certain death, the guarded 
tomb, the empty sepulchre, the unexpected appear- 
ances testified to by the honest, earnest disciples, the 
character of the witnesses, the rise of the Christian 
faith, the consistent lives and sacrifice of these wit- 
nesses make the resurrection the most truly authen- 
ticated event of ancient history.’ 

On what ground will any candid student of these 
evidences throw out the testimony of the apostles? 

On a priori ground? Then they but walk in the foot- 


! See Schaff’s Church History, vol. 1, p. 181. 


108 EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY 


prints of Hume and thresh over his old straw. On 
scientific grounds? What has science discovered 
that denies this testimony? ‘They who would retain 
their Christianity and still deny, or refuse to admit, 
this miracle must stand and be judged at the bar of 
apostolic testimony. 


CHAPTER XII 
PAUL 


THE GENUINENESS OF ACTS 


Tue Acts of the Apostles is the narration of the 
rise of the Christian Church at Jerusalem, and its 
development and spread, until Paul, one of the great 
apostles, is establishing his aggressive faith at Rome. 
The book is amply proved to have been written by 
Luke, the companion of Paul. The introduction of 
the Gospel according to Luke and the preface of the 
Acts, the style and structure of both books consti- 
tute powerful internal evidence. Nor is its external 
proof less. Clement of Rome, Ignatius, Polycarp, 
Hermas, Justin Martyr, all reproduce its language. 
It stands in the Syriac and old Latin versions as it 
stands in the New Testament to-day. Prof. Har- 
nack, a most advanced and in some respects rational- 
istic historian, locates both Luke and Acts in the 
first century. Its accuracy in all details is wonderful. 
None but a most competent eyewitness could have 
written it. 

No one doubts that Paul wrote the Romans, First 
and Second Corinthians and Galatians. There are 


110 EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY 


nearly forty coincidences in the four epistles and the 
Acts, with no possible reference from one to the 
other. That a companion of Paul wrote it, is proved 
beyond a shadow of a doubt. The book is a unity, 
for the oldest quotations are from the passages not 
containing the ‘‘we,’’ as well as from those which in- 
clude this much discussed word.’ ? 
The Acts accounts for the rapid spread of Chris- 
tianity. That Christianity spread with great rapid- 
ity we can easily infer from Roman historians. 
There was a great multitude of Christians in Rome 
in the year 64 A. D. according to Tacitus.? In the 
province of Pontus and Bithynia, Pliny the Younger 
reports that “the number of the Christians was so 
large that the heathen altars had been well nigh de- 
serted, and there had been no market for the sale 
of animals for sacrifice.” Pliny reports also that — 
‘the temples which were almost forsaken to be more 
frequented,’ showing that his administration was 
overcoming ‘‘the superstition.”’—A. D, 107. 


PAUL SAW JESUS 


The Acts of the Apostles gives the historical 
ground for this rapid spread, and is in every way an 
authentic history. It contains the record of the 
conversion of Saul of Tarsus, which accounts are 


! M’Clymont’s New Testament and Its Writers, p. 42. 
2 Tac. Ann.. xv. 44. 
3 See Lardner on Pliny, vol. 7, p. 24. 


PAUL 111 


corroborated by Paul in First Corinthians and Gala- 
tians. ‘Three times is it narrated in the Acts, viz.: 
Acts 9, 22, 26. In Galatians 1:13-17 and Ist Cor. 
15:8 and 9:1, Paul affirms the same event. 

When the faith of the crucified Nazarene began 
to rise like a mighty flood in Jerusalem, Saul of 
Tarsus, a young Pharisee, a pupil of Gamaliel, and 
a most zealous Jew, was one of those who were de- 
termined to stamp out this destructive heresy. He 
was evidently a member of a court which condemned 
Christians, probably a member of the Sanhedrim.’ 
While going to Damascus, on the road, at midday, a 
great light appeared unto him, a person revealed 
himself and gave positive evidence that the reveal- 
ing one was Jesus of Nazareth. Paul says in Gala- 
tians: ‘“‘It was the good pleasure of God, who sepa- 
rated me even from my mother’s womb, and called 
me through His grace, to reveal His Son in me.” 
The fiercest persecutor at once became Paul the 
mightiest advocate. 


HE WAS TOTALLY UNPREPARED 


Paul had opposed Christianity with a good con- 
science.” He had seen Stephen die, consenting and 
aiding in his death. ‘Hard for thee to kick against 
the goad,” means: “It is for thee a difficult under- 
taking that thou shouldest contend against My will.” 


¥ Acts 26:10. 2 Acts 23:1, 26:0. 3% Meyer on Acts, 16:14. 


112 EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY 


This occurrence took place away from Jerusalem, 
and perhaps as much as four years after Jesus ap- 
peared unto the apostles. To some minds this 
change in Paul is the most remarkable thing in Bible- 
history. He went ‘breathing threatening and 
slaughter.” He came back ‘‘preaching Jesus and 
the resurrection.”’ Dr. Baur who had maintained 
the vision-hypothesis admits that it cannot explain 
how God ‘‘revealed His Son in Paul; and adds 
that ‘‘this miracle appears all the greater when we 
remember that in this revulsion of his consciousness 
he broke through the barriers of Judaism and rose 
out of its particularism into the universalism of 
Christianity.” | 

How can this “revulsion of consciousness”’ be ex- 
plained in such a man as Paul? There is only one 
possible adequate explanation. He saw Jesus. 


PAUL’S PERSONAL TESTIMONY 


In First Corinthians, Paul gives the appearances 
of Jesus to the apostles and brethren. Five of these 
appearances had been witnessed to him by the 
apostles. ‘They include one to ‘five hundred breth- 
ren at once, of whom the greater part remain until 
now, but some are fallen asleep.” 

This is most remarkable testimony. Paul’s char- 


! For a full discussion of this, see Schaff’s Church History, 
vol. I, p. 315. 


PAUL 113 


acter is one of the purest of all human history. His 
integrity may have been assailed at Corinth, but we 
never should have known it if he had not unselfishly 
alluded to it. Would he have risked his standing in 
the church, and indeed his whole cause, on the state- 
ment that a greater part of the five hundred wit- 
nesses were still living, if it had not been true? 

‘Last of all, as unto one born out of due time, He 
appeared to me also.’” Paul is an apostle, but an 
independent witness. ‘The Epistle to the Romans 
alone proves its writer one of the brainiest of men, 
deep and safe in his thought, strong and sound in 
logic, the last man in all ancient history to be de- 
luded. Paul had communications with Jesus after- 
wards, but they all are distinguished from this one, 
which was an appearance to confirm the resurrec- 
tion. Paul gave his life in obedience to the com- 
mand of the resurrected Jesus, sealing his testimony 
with his martyrdom. He was the sanest and hum- 
blest of men. It is no sacrilege to say that those 
who try to explain away the miracles of early Chris- 
tianity are broken when they stumble upon Paul, 
and that those upon whom he falls, are ground into 
powder. 


THE CONCURRENT TEST 


The evidence from the apostles and Paul concern- 
ing the miracle of the resurrection can be summed 


t rst. Cor.. 15:8. 


114 EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY 


up along every line of our test. “The number, the 
goodness, the education, the learning and integrity 
are all provided for in these witnesses and in the 
way in which they, through years of struggle and 
sacrifice, presented the evidence. In the face of a 
sinful, hostile world they submitted their evidence 
to the very sunlight of investigation, fearing no pos- 
sibility of being detected in falsehood. “In so cele- 
brated a part of the world as to render the detection 
unavoidable,” yea, in the very place where the resur- 
rection occurred, they had their greatest number of 
converts and also the attesting facts in the rise and 
growth of Christianity and the Christian church. 
Chrysostom says—‘‘For the Christian religion to 
have spread over the world without miracles, would 
be a greater miracle than any recorded in the New 
Testament.” 


CHAPTER XIII 


THE CHURCH AS CHRIST’S MONU- 
MENT 


CHRISTIANITY WAS BEFORE THE NEW 
TESTAMENT 


Tue New Testament was a growth of the first 
century. Document after document was written by 
many men in different places. Paul wrote from Cor- 
inth, from the barracks at Rome; Peter wrote from 
Babylon, wherever that was; John wrote from Ephe- 
sus. Professor Harnack pushes the date of the epis- 
tles backward several years earlier than formerly 
accepted, even by the orthodox teachers. So that 
we can safely assume that from some year in the 
fifties until the year ninety-five, this book of the 
Kingdom arose. Under these circumstances it is 
plain that Christianity was the cause of, and pro- 
duced, the New Testament, in the effectual sense of 
the word cause. There was a religion, perfected as 
a saving faith, fully developed in every essential, 
which antedates the books from which we have 
learned it. There was also a church, an organiza- 
tion whose welfare called forth these documents. 
The very oldest perhaps is the First Thessalonians, 


116 EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY 


written for instruction and particularly about 
Christ’s second coming. Here we have the fullest 
evidence for a well organized church in the year 53 
A. D. disturbed by speculations concerning Christ’s 
second advent. 


CHRIST IS BEFORE CHRISTIANITY 


But Christianity itself is an effect. ‘The power of 
a character, a life, supremely good and divine, is be- 
hind Christianity. Jesus Christ lived, and if He had 
not been what His disciples represented Him to be, 
then whence came Christianity? Where are the 
germs that brought forth the fruitage? Evolution, 
mechanical, theistic or any other, stands dumb when 
it confronts this phenomenon of the first century. 
It could not be explained, not even upon the ground — 
of a revealing God, without the personal revelation, 
Jesus Christ. The only adequate and reason- 
able explanation is in the life, death and resurrection 


of the God-Man. 


THE CHURCH IS HIS MONUMENT 


From His earthly life the church arose and has 
continued nearly two thousand years. Its material 
is human lives in process of struggle with sin. Hence 
it must be expected to be an imperfect organization. 
But its ideal is perfect righteousness and holiness. 
It has sometimes fallen very low in the conflict; but 


THE CHURCH AS CHRIST’S MONUMENT 117 


has always had enough spiritual light and power to 
arise and, in newness of the old life, march onward 
towards its goal of victory. Nothing ever could 
have saved the church from the times of Nero until 
now if it had not possessed a great supernatural 
source and supply. With all their defects and divi- 
sions, all churches, Greek, Roman Catholic and 
Protestant, look back to their common origin and 
creator, Jesus Christ. 


ITS GROWTH 


Why did it expand so rapidly and effectually? No 
keener critic of its growth has ever written about 
this wonderful progress than Gibbon in his “Decline 
and Fall of the Roman Empire.” There are the 
five causes which he assigns for the spread of Chris- 
tianity—‘‘the zeal of Christians,” “their doctrine of 
a future life,” ‘the miraculous powers ascribed to 
the primitive church,” ‘their pure and austere 
morals,” and ‘‘their union.” But, pray, what was 
the cause of these elements? Did these produce 
Christianity? Did not Christianity produce these 
elements in human lives? 


NOT FROM HUMAN ENTHUSIASM 


Christianity is too deep to have for its cause hu- 
man euthusiasm for better things. Truly the thought- 
ful men of the world were sick of its infamy, indeed, 


118 EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY 


always had been. Seneca’s denunciation of the so- 
ciety of his times was an old story. But none saw 
the true malady nor the remedy. Christianity 
charged men with sin in a way that had never been 
known before. It assured them that they were 
hopelessly lost, that there was no avenue of escape 
open. It raised the consciousness of guilt and hope- 
less futurity. Enthusiasts never arise in this way. 
He who was the foremost preacher of Christianity 
called himself the chiefest of sinners; and this is 
characteristic of all the apostles and disciples. 
Christianity proposed to remove this guilt and to 
change this hopeless fate, not by any trifling nor 
human means, but by faith in the atonement through 
the death of Jesus Christ. Immortal life was of- 
fered through His resurrection. ‘This is as far as 
can be imagined from the methods of human enthu- — 
siasts.’ 


JUDAISM CANNOT ACCOUNT FOR IT 


Nor can the system of religion called Judaism ac- 
count for Christianity. Their connection is histori- 
cal and vital. ‘The last and greatest of the Jewish 
prophets, John the Baptist, was the forerunner and 
attestor of Jesus as the Savior. The Old Testament 
and the New are one in author, spirit and purpose. 
But Judaism had become useless as a saving faith. 


! Hopkins’ Evidences, p. 188. 


THE CHURCH AS CHRIST’S MONUMENT 119 


Its roots of truth and the spiritual kingdom of a 
righteous God were hidden. Jesus brought them 
to light, and then endowed them with a life and 
power of which the most enlightened Jews had 
never dreamed. The teacher of Israel wonderingly 
said: “How can these things be?” Jesus opposed 
the whole Jewish system of His day. He shattered 
its sectarianism and bigotry. He bade farewell to 
its temple and its sacred places. His whole life ran 
counter to their ideas of Messiah. He set aside 
even the ceremonial law by fulfilling it. He gave up 
His life in the face of the condemnation of the holy 
council of the Jews; and then set His death over 
against their entire religious system, calmly declar- 
ing that He had come into the world for this pur- 
pose, and confident that His death would revolution- 
ize the world. And it has and will. This is not the 
way in which a mere Jewish reformer would have 


lived and died. 


THE SACRAMENT IS A MONUMENT 


The Christian church with its pecular institutions 
has to be accounted for. The Lord’s Supper alone 
furnishes an unanswerable argument for its founder. 
That Jesus instituted it is beyond question; and un- 
derneath all the form and ceremony, that often has 
been attached to it, the church has ever discerned 


? John 3:9. 


120 EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY — 


the body and blood of the Lord. From the Aly of 
the apostles this monument has been in evidence, a 
constant proof of His death and an assurance of 
His return. ‘The resurrection of Jesus alone can 
account for the enduring vitality of this holy sacra- 
ment. A living Jesus is the only logical inference 
from this monumental fact. ‘‘And ever since has 
this blessed institution lain as the golden morning 
light far out even in the church’s darkest night—not 
only the seal of His presence and its pledge, but also 
the promise of the bright day at His coming.”* 


¥ Edersheim, vol. 2, p. 512. 


CHAPTER XIV 
PROPHECY 


‘THE very nature of prophecy is miraculous. A 
correct induction of a wise forecast or a mere coin- 
cidence of statement and succeeding event cannot ac- 
count for Scripture prophecies. Justin Martyr said: 
‘To declare a thing shall come to be, long before it 
is in being, and then to bring about that very thing 
according to the same declaration, this, or nothing, 
is the work of God.” 

In Isaiah 44:28 the prophet says: ‘“That saith 
of Cyrus, He is my shepherd, and shall perform all 
my pleasure; even saying of Jerusalem, She shall be 
built; and to the temple, Thy foundation shall be 
laid.” A century and a half after these words were 
written, Cyrus in his decree writes as follows: Ezra 
1 :3——‘‘Whosoever there is among you of all his 
people, his God be with him, and let him go up to 
Jerusalem, which is in Judah, and build the house of 
the Lord, the God of Israel, (He is the God) which 
is in Jerusalem.”’ On this passage Dr. Mark Hop- 
kins says: “History itself could not be more plain 
or specific, and such events were plainly beyond the 
reach of human sagacity.’” 


? Hopkins’ Lowell Lectures, ch. on Prophecy. — 


122 EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY 


But Isaiah and Jeremiah are abundant in such re- 
markable evidence of genuine prophecy. 


CHRISTIANITY AND JESUS CHRIST IN 
PROPHECY 


Although the Jews in Jesus’ time had largely lost 
the spiritual truths of the old religion of Israel, their 
scriptures possessed enough of this prophetic ele- 
ment to warrant the claim that Jesus of Nazar 
was an historical fulfilment of them. 

Jesus appealed to the Scriptures. We prove on 
Scriptures through Jesus. This is not reasoning in 
a circle; but is as if one person should prove that 
the rain is coming because certain kinds of clouds — 
gather, and afterwards another person proves that 
certain clouds have gathered because it has rained. 
These are independent lines of reasoning and are 
valid. 

John the Baptist was prophesied in Mal. 4, in 
Isa. 40:3. The Christ was to be of the house of 
David in Isa, 11:10, Jer. 23:5, 6. The place of 
birth was prophesied in Micah 5:2. Christ was to- 
work miracles, Isa. 35:5, 6. He was to enter Jeru- 
salem in a kingly and prophetic manner, Zech. 9:9. 
He was to be rejected, Isa. 8:14, 53:2, 3; scourged 
and mocked, Isa. 50:6. Almost the entire cruci- 
fixion scene is in Psalm 22, Zech. 12:10 and Isa. 


PROPHECY 123 


53:9. He was to rise from the grave, Psalm 16:10. 
These are some texts in the Old Testament which 
were fulfilled in detail in Jesus’ life on earth. Here 
we face the evidence of a stupendous miracle, both 
in the giving of these prophecies and the experi- 
ences of our Lord. 


JESUS’ KINGDOM WAS PROPHESIED 


The Bible, both in the Old and New Testaments, 
is the Book of the Kingdom of God. The Old 
Testament prophesied that in Messiah, or Christ, 
that Kingdom would become world-wide, not by 
arms but by peace, not a government of human con- 
trol, but of divine supernatural power (Isa. 5 :6-7). 
The Gentiles would be included, unto the ends of the 
earth (Isa. 49:6 and 40:3-5). Jesus designedly 
fulfilled these, it will be said. But to designedly 
fulfill these would require supernatural power. His 
enemies also fulfilled some of these prophecies. Did 
they designedly do it? 


JESUS AND THE APOSTLES PROPHESIED 


He foretold His death and the manner thereof in 
Hongo Matt, 17:22,.23, Mark .9:31;° Luke 
9:44; in the same passages He tells them that He 
will rise again. They acknowledge that they did not 
believe these things, could not understand them, yet 
afterwards they remembered. 


124 EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY 


Jesus prophesied the Jewish war and the destruc- 
tion of the holy city, the utter overthrow of the tem- 
ple and the flight of the Christians, in Matt. 24, 
Mark 13, Luke 21. We have but to read Josephus 
and ‘Tacitus, and the miraculousness of these chap- 
ters is incontestable. 

The spread of the Christian religion was also a 
matter of prophecy with Jesus. Witness the para- 
ble of the mustard seed. The apostles were to be 
witnesses to all nations for their evangelization, 
Acts 1:8, Matt. 28:19, 20. Jesus warned them, and 
prepared them to meet the very events of their 
apostolic life, prophesying even the death of Peter, 
in John 21:19. 

We have but glanced at this line of proof of the 
supernaturalness of Christianity. The argument 
from prophecy alone would make a creditable case. 


CHAPTER XV 


THE TEST OF MORALITY AND 
EXPERIENCE 


Christianity, like its author, offers itself to every 
honest test. ‘he character of Jesus which we have 
considered grows brighter and purer the longer and 
more deeply it is studied. His religion also though 
taught by means of earthen vessels’ reflects the 
perfect image of Jesus Christ. Every cardinal 
point may be tried by moral and experiential tests; 
and the severer the trial the more satisfactory will 
be the result. Morality will confess a superior in- 
stitution in Christianity; and experience will ac- 
knowledge its supreme comfort and satisfactoriness. 
Reaching this decision, and comparing Christianity 
with the other religions of the world, we shall find 
that there is no other that in the light of these facts 
can be called a religion. If Christianity endures this 
moral and experimental] test, then in view of its ex- 
ternal evidences, in comparison with other forms of 
belief, it is the only spiritual religion. Christianity 
professes to be a saving religion, and the only sav- 
ing religion. ‘And in none other is there salvation; 


! 2nd Cor. 4:7. 


126 EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY 


for neither is there any other name under heaven, 
that is given among men, wherein we must be 
saved.’? There is no need to compare Christianity 
with other forms of religious belief; if Christianity 
is proved supernatural and true, then any truths 
which may be in others cannot save them from being 
false religions. 7 


CARDINAL DOCTRINES. GOD 


God is revealed, in al] His attributes, a perfect 
being, self-existent and infinite, not removed far 
from His creatures, nor identified with them, as in 
deism and pantheism, but near and with a living 
providence caring for them. God is perfectly just 
and merciful. He overlooks the weakness and 
failings of men, not that they may be lightly for- 
given, but looking onward to the redemption which 
He is to accomplish for them. God is love and 
holiness. It is enough to say that no other concep- 
tion of God from any source can be compared to 
this. 

MAN THE SINFUL CHILD 


Christianity appeals to the conscience of fallen 
man, and asks if its charge of depravity is not true. 
It boldly accuses us of sin by nature and deed. It 
never glosses over the iniquities of our natural heart. 
It never closes the question until the stain is entirely 


1 Acts 4:12. 





MORALITY AND EXPERIENCE 127 


removed. This sinful man is still an offspring of 
God, made in His image but lost. Sin is traced back 
to the root, in sin, the principle of disobedience 
which is in the human soul. We submit this to our 
moral consciousness, and behold, we recognize the 
truth which could not be known without Christianity. 
Experience and the Christian doctrine of sin are in 
perfect harmony. 


SALVATION 


Christianity proposes to save this sinful being. 
Into his darkened soul a ray of light is sent, a 
voice speaks hope and cheer. Man is lost, but need 
not be forever so. Life becomes hopeful. Even 
this experience of struggle is infinitely better than 
the hopeless lethargy of unaroused sinful men; and 
assurance is given with full proof, that hereafter 
there will be perfect life. What a contrast with 
any other form of faith! The Christian Heaven is 
where God’s will is perfectly obeyed, and all His 
creatures praise and serve Him—rest and activity 
perfect each other. 


THE ATONEMENT 


The means to this end is the atonement wrought 
by Jesus Christ. Here we come to the keenest 
moral test; but this citadel of our faith arises far 
above, and our morality can but stand in awe and 


128 EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY 


reverence before it. The atonement is vicarious. 
Jesus Christ, though sinless, was made sin for us. 
“fe bare our sins,’ suffered on account of them, 
died under this suffering and thus atoned for them. 
He proved Himself the Son of God, and as such 
could do this vicarious work. Only a God could 
have done it. Eternal justice is satisfied. God's 
supreme government is vindicated in the sinful do- 
main, man is saved, and there is no other way mor- 
ally conceivable. ‘The ideal of God’s perfect gov- 
ernment is shattered if we accept any lower view 
of the atonement. 

Further, this atonement is voluntary. This com- 
pletes the moral structure and lifts it far above us. 
Jesus Christ was not compelled to die. He made 
Himself the substitute. ‘“‘Who being in the form 
of God, counted it not a prize to be on an equality 
with God, but emptied Himself, taking the form of 
a servant, being made in the likeness of men; and 
being found in fashion as a man, He humbled Him- 
self, becoming obedient even unto death, yea, the 
death of the cross.”* Human morality never con- 
ceived such an ideal as this; and Jesus’ life, espe- 
cially when He, knowing all that awaited Him, 
‘steadfastly set His face to go to Jerusalem,” real- 
ized it. This voluntary element in the atonement, 
coupled with the judicial, makes it the simplest 
and profoundest conception that ever has arisen 


1 Phil. 2:6, 7, 8. 


MORALITY AND EXPERIENCE 129 


among men. It came not a dry dogma, but a liy- 
ing actor who performed it by deed and demon- 
stration. The epistles of the New Testament are 
absolutely inconceivable without the life of Jesus. 
No human origin can account for this teaching; 
none for such a life. 


CHRISTIAN MORALS 


But Christianity makes men good in this world. 
Truly this goodness is not perfect, but is to be per- 
fected. “Ye therefore shall be perfect, as your 
heavenly Father is perfect.” Face it with our 
moral consciousness, and decide !—Can we lower it? 
Dare we lower it? Can such an ideal be derived 
from a human source? Still once having obtained, 
we recognize it as the only perfect ideal, and we 
cannot lower it. We are just as helpless in our in- 
ability to lower it, as we should have been in our 
ability to erect it. 

Another moral proof is the perfect reconciliation 
between the two principles of self-interest and un- 
selfishness. ‘They never had been reconciled, they 
never could be in the limitations of human thought. 
Yet the germs of both are valid and imperishable 
in human nature. Jesus denied Himself and taught 
His disciples to deny themselves. At the same 
time He was toiling for His Kingdom and His 
throne. “Who for the joy that was set before Him, 


130 EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY 
endured the cross.’ Hence the Christian virtue is 
unselfish, and at the same time seeks the destined 
reward. The reward does not vitiate the virtue, 
nor does the virtue o’erlook the reward. ‘This har- 
mony was in Jesus’ life, and His is the unselfish- 
ness that challenges the admiration of the ages. We 
have it in Him, not as a moral philosophy but as a 
moral life; and we are constrained to say, no human 
agent could have invented it. 


EXPERIENCE 


Jesus Christ the divine Savior of men can be re- 
ceived only by faith. Faith is the ultimate test. 
“Have faith” was Jesus’ urgent command, Faith © 
apprehends the spiritual Jesus. Hence they who 
have faith are qualified witnesses to Jesus and Chris- 
tianity. They are not biased; they are competent 
to testify internal evidence. Just as the witness on 
the stand who has received benefit or injury from a 
certain medicinal remedy, is not biased but compe- 
tent, so those whom Christianity has reached with 
saving power are in every way admissible to testify 
this. And what a multitude can be summoned! 


JESUS CHRIST AND THE GREAT WORLD WAR 


When the great war had been fully launched and 
Europe was lurid with the flame of battle in 1914; 


li Feb. 32:24. 


MORALITY AND EXPERIENCE 131 


and to the deeper students of history the participa- 
tion of the greater part of the world seemed certain, 
then the opponents of Jesus Christ in religion and 
philosophy flung a challenge into the face of the 
Christian churches: ‘“‘the religion of Jesus Christ 
has failed!” | Ln 

In all that terrible struggle it was true that Chris- 
tianity and Jesus Christ were brought to the severest 
test of all history. Some lighter thinkers among 
the defenders of Christianity endeavored to foil 
this attack by showing that this particular war was 
prophesied by the Scriptures and even by Jesus 
Christ Himself. 

Others sought refuge in the hope that this was 
the Armageddon of the Apocalypse, and that Jesus 
Christ would come at the climax of the fighting to 
take all governments of this earth and make them 
His millennial kingdom. 

But the sober, thoughtful students of church his- 
tory realized only a war, one of many, though per- 
haps the greatest, of all human history; they read 
the words of Jesus, ‘‘and when ye shall hear of wars 
and rumors of wars be not troubled; these things 
must needs come to pass; but the end is not yet.’” 
So they took up arms for their countries and polit- 
ical ideals, doing their duty according to their re- 
spective covenants with their governments, knowing 
that God was “highest of all’? and that Jesus Christ 


1 Mark 13:7. 


132 EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY 


would reign through all the conflict of nations, and 
that after the war had ended He still would ‘“‘have 
the government upon His shoulder.’” 

It is true that the war was caused very largely be- 
cause of the neglect that a self-seeking world had 
wrought against Jesus. 

German thought, both scholastic and popular, had 
wandered far from the old simple faith of Luther. 
A literary pride had reduced the accepted facts of 
Jesus’ life to the very fewest, and His words and 
deeds to the “irreducible minimum.”’ : 

Losing this faith in the historical Jesus Christ, 
Germany lost the strongest fiber of her character. 

Nor were England and America guiltless; for 
this same deep, satanic intrigue had permeated 
many of their schools and had stultified many of 
their pulpits. 

A Christian world losing its grasp upon the his- 
torical Jesus Christ is a fit subject for the “loosing 
of the red horseman.” | 

But what of the challenge from the adversaries? 

The war is ended; the question of the imperialism 
of thrones is forever answered; but the imperialism 
of anarchy is rampant still and threatening the very 
life of humanity. 

During the great war, Jesus Christ ‘came unto 
His own”’ as never before. Everywhere He was the 
dominant religious factor. 


1 Isa. 9:6. 


-~ MORALITY AND EXPERIENCE 133 


This testimony is given and corroborated by many 
witnesses who had opportunity to test the issue. 

The author was a private in the Home Guard of 
his state and held all the non-commissioned offices 
except first sergeant; then he was a commissioned 
officer of the Brigade Staff; then an appointed and 
acting chaplain of a regiment; then a commissioned 
officer in the United States Army; then acting as 
chaplain of a cantonment of seven thousand Amer- 
ican soldiers. ‘This experience opened comradeship 
with nearly all elements of an army. Everywhere 
and among all, Jesus Christ was the almost universal 
religious ideal and hope. With but little knowledge 
of His life, works or word; with no religious habits, 
no prayer, and but few associations with His ordi- 
nances; yet even profane men would express their 
faith in Jesus. In some way He was their savior. 

Hundreds of testimonies have come from the 
armies in Europe that the same primal faith in Jesus 
Christ was the dominant note of the religious life of 
those vast forces. 

Dying German and French soldiers prayed with 
each other on the blood soaked turf; German and 
English boys looked alike to Jesus Christ as they 
breathed their last in a final comradeship of death. 

During and since the war France has had a re- 
vival of worship as the consequence of her extremity 
when she, with her back against the wall, went to her 


Christ for help. 


134 EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY - 


Germany is realizing her neglect of the Jesus 
Christ through whose Scriptures and by whose free- 
dom the Germany of the olden time was made free. 

This sentiment is expressed in all the nations that 
have suffered in the dreadful cataclysm. 

‘Unless we turn again to the principles of Jesus 
Christ and make them the foundation of our na- 
tional life, there is no hope for the world.” ‘This 
was said by many at nearly the same time in the 
year 1919. Jesus Christ and Christianity were 
proved in the great world war and were found to be 
the final and only ground of a universal comradeship 
for eternal peace. 

A sergeant of the A. E. F. said: ‘The universal 
religious doctrine of the French Poilu and the Amer- 
ican Doughboy was ‘Jesus Christ my substitute, with 
me in the trench, by me in the barrage, and to save 
me if my call comes.’ A chaplain of the A. E. F. in 
one of the hospitals where there were thousands of 
casualties, said: ‘Everywhere I went among the 
wounded, sick and dying the universal refuge was 
‘Jesus Saves’ ” 


CONCLUSION 


We conclude from the foregoing evidence, both 
external and internal, that Christianity stands unique 
and alone, the only supernatural religion. We 
have shown that revealed religion to be effective 
in binding sinful man to his Holy Maker, forgiving 


MORALITY AND EXPERIENCE 135 


and saving the lost and constantly lifting them into 
purer moral life, must have supernatural attestation 
without, and conscious virtues within. It must be 
universal, suited to all men in all places, and after 
its revelation good for all time. Such is Christian- 
ity. No one can doubt that Buddha lived and that 
his ashes are buried in Nepal; that as a philosoph- 
ical reformer he was far in advance of the super- 
stitious priest-craft of his day. But he left no sav- 
ing faith nor spiritual power that solves the prob- 
lem of sin, or answers the yearnings for holiness and 
Heaven. This can be said of every other claimant 
to the founding of a religious faith except the Christ 
who founded Christianity. He and His Gospel, en- 
during every test, are to-day standing out in clearer 
and stronger light, enhanced by the evidence of 
every new, regenerate heart. He is the only Savior. 
Christianity is the only true religion. 


THE END 


FROM LETTERS OF COMMENDATION 


From the late Dr. George P. Fisher, of Yale— 


“* * Tt is the product of sound thought and careful study 
and it cannot fail to be a useful manual.” 


Fyrom the late Dr. Jacob Cooper, of Rutgers College (the 
Author’s college professor )— , 


“IT was much interested in your Manual of Christian Evi- 
dences * * * and I hope you will publish a second edition of it. 

“Can you not enlarge it, working in some more proofs 
from the Anthropological side: thus combining the direct evi- 
dences of the writers of Revelation, with the ideas growing out 
of Teleology—which seems to me the ground: for the battle 
with Infidelity in the future?” 


From Dr. Charles E. Hart, of Rutgers College (the Author’s 
college professor )— 
“You have made a most compact exposition with no sacri- 
fice of clearness and completeness.” 


From Dr. W. O. Rustin, Dean of the Faculty of Dubuque 
College. and Seminary— 


“I desire to express my pleasure in reading your excellent 
work on ‘Evidences’. 

“It cannot but do good in this period when sound teaching 
and right thinking are so much needed. It is brief and crisp, 
and many will no doubt be willing to read it who would not 
have time for larger works. 

“T trust that it will have a wide sale. 

“It will be considered in our Apologetic Department.” 


BIBLIOGRAPHY 


Apologetics must ever shift its point of defense as the foe 
will shift his attack. Evidence of Christianity never has 
shifted its ground; but ever extends its front, and advances 
as the Gospel forces move onward to conquer this world for 
Jesus Christ. Hence, some of the older works are not to be 
neglected. We name a few, together with some more up to 
date, that seem to the author to be of special value in his 
studies of forty years, with regrets that we must omit others 
of great value. Some of these older books are out of print 
and can be bought only at the “old book” stores. 


“The Works of Dr. Nathaniel Lardner,’ ten volumes includ- 
ing the topics, The Credibility of the Gospel History, His- 
tory of the Apostles and Evangelists, Jewish Testimonies to 
‘the Truth of the Christian Religion, Testimony of Ancient 
Heathen Authors, Imperial Laws that Evidence Chris- 
tianity, State of Gentilism under Christian Emperors, His- 
tory of Heretics, Vindication of Our Savior’s Miracles; and 
in Volume Ten an index by which every mention of Jesus 
Christ or His religion in the Scriptures or in heathen lit- 
erature can be found in full. This great work is invalu- 
able and fundamental to our subject. The author has used 
the edition of 1838, published by William Ball, of London. 


“Ante-Nicene Church Fathers,’ ten volumes “translations of 
the Writings of the Fathers down to 325 A. D.” Charles 
Scribner, N. Y., 1899. Every volume is indexed. 


Paley’s “Evidences of Christianity.” 
Butler’s “Analogy.” 


“Evidences of Christianity,’ by Rev. Archibald Alexander, D. 
D., published by the Presbyterian Board of Publication. 


“The Evidences of Christianity in their External or Historical 
Division,’ by Charles Pettit M’Ilvaine, D. D., Bishop of the 
Protestant Episcopal Church, Philadelphia, 1859. 


“Evidences of Christianity,’ by Mark Hopkins, D. D., LL. D., 
published by Marvin and Son, Boston, 1900. : 

“Grounds of Theistic and Christian Belief and Manual of 
Christian Evidences,’ by George Park Fisher, D. D., LL. © 
D. Charles Scribner and Sons, N. Y., 1902. 

“A Manual of Christian Evidences,’ by C. A. Row, M. A,, 
published by Thomas Wittaker. Bible House, N. Y. . 
“Apologetics: or, Christianity Defensively Stated,’ by A. B. 

Bruce, 1892. . 


“The Evidence of Christian Experience,’ by Lewis French 
Stearns, D. D. Charles Scribner’s Sons, N. Y.; 1899. 


“Handbook of Christian Apologetics,’ by Alfred E. Garvie, | 
M. A., D. D. Charles Scribner, N. Y., 1913. 

“The Deciding Voice of the Monuments in Biblical Criticism,” 
by Melvin Grove Kyle, D. D., LL. D. Bibliotheca Sacra 
Co., Oberlin, Ohio, 1912. | 

“The New Biblical Guide,’ by the Rev. John Urquhart. 
Marshall Bros., London. Eight volumes. 

“A Reply to Harnack on the Essence of Christianity,’ by Her- 
mann Cramer, D. D., LL. D. ‘Translated by Bernhard - 
Pick, Ph. D., D. D. Funk and Wagnalls, N. Y., 1903. 

“The New Apologetic,’ Milton $. Terry, D. D., LL. D. 
Eaton and Mains, N. Y. 

“A System of Christian Evidence,’ Lutheran Literary Board, 
1922, and “Contending for the Faith,’ 1920, by Leander S. 
Keyser, D. D. Geo. Doran, N. Y. 


TABLE OF CONTENTS 


Topic : Page 


BA UMITIOLIOTE ooo relics iateotok Se esvcb loinc orterasielsns execeees RUE OL 
Definition—Nature of the Evidence—Internal and 
External Evidence—Cumulative Evidence—Scope of 
Ingquiry—Result. 


CHAPTER I 
PR REEE LPEWAIREY) NUXASEOTROOH C5255) 8e 0) clots ces cccdesspaceuctatceestevssdueteneosesctieves 
Ontological Argument—Cosmological i Sean cies 
ological Argument—Moral Argument. 


CHAPTER ITI 
| ELE Ea EUS SG a RRR Paes ERR Dyck WOM ac OLA TEND ay 
Revelation and Inspiration—Possibility: of Revelation 
—Probability of Revelation—God is Merciful—Neces- 
sity of Revelation. 


CHAPTER III 4 
TES, ASG Gai OIA A SSB, SARS ARP SS SA Re OSG RY Opa A 
Sufficient Cause in Divine Existence—Sufficient Cause 
in Need of Revelation—Pantheistic ‘Objections— 
Hume’s Argument—Hume’s Fallacy—Rationalistie Ob- 
jections—Scientific Objections—Ethical Answer—His- 
torical Answer—Scientific Answer—Early Opponents 
—Presumption against Miracles Removed. 


CHAPTER IV 


Proof of Miracles from Common Ground.....................cc000.000 
Common Ground—Paul’s Miracles in Romans—Words 
of Jesus—Present Day Miracles. 


CHAPTER V 


Authenticity of the Old Testament............0..0... cece eeeeee 
Use of Terms—Preservation—Old Testament formerly 
Uncorroborated—Rise of Higher Criticism—Rise of 
Archreology—Monumental Vindication—Jesus and the 
Old Testament—Harmony of the Old and New. 


15 


26 


30 


40 


46 


CHAPTER VI 


Presumption of Documents from Roman Historians............ 
Statement of Tacitus—Statement of Suetonius—Testi- 
mony from Pliny—Value of this Testimony—The 
Greek Language and the Jews—A First larvae ath Chris- 
tian Literature. 


CHAPTER VII 


Genuineness of the Gospel According to Johm..............0....... 
Structure of the New Testament—Genuineness, Cred- 
ibility and Supernaturalness—Genuineness of John— 
Ireneus—Subsequent Testimony—Tertullian—Clement 
—Theophilus—Muratorian Canon—Latin and Syriac 
Versions—Tatian—Justin— Polycarp—-Papias— Igna- 
tius—The Heretics—The Didache—Summary of the 
External Evidence—Internal Evidencee—Who was 
“this Disciple?’”—Who is the Unnamed Disciple?—He 
is in Another Group—All are Excluded except John. 


CHAPTER VIII 


Genuineness of the Symopties......0..0000..cc ccc ccccecceccceeessceenseeeares 
The Synoptic Problem—John Presumes Other Gospels— 
Testimony of Justin Martyr—Testimony of. Papias— 
Earlier Epistolary Evidence—Epistle of Polycarp— 
Epistle of Barnabas—Epistles of Clement of Rome— 
The Didache—Testimony to Luke’s Gospel—No Harly 
Defence Needed—Irenzeus Testifies—‘‘Gospels” are 
‘““Memorials”—Subsequent Evidence. 


CHAPTER IX 


New Testament Credibility and Authenticity.......................... 
The Universal Attestation—Character of the Writers 
—their Humility—their Candor—Deceivers, Deceived 
or Honest Men with Facts—Harmony. 


CHAPTER X 
Character of! JOsus ciel sic lakeatiaheotbaceeeauncnapaeanunes 
A Many Sided Character—Huxley and the Gadarene 
Swine—Positive Witness— No Self-Reproach — His 
Character is a Miracle—The Son of God. 


CHAPTER XI 


Authenticity of the Resurrection of Jesus............00..00...0. 
Hume’s Test—Importance—Jesus’ Death—The Burial 


61 


%3 


84 


92 


99 


and Watch—The Four Accounts—The Empty Tomb— 
First-Day Appearances—Appearances Afterwards— 
Character of the Appearances. 


CHAPTER XII 
MRRP Me ay eae Gir Sel apanslss candids aeieaes Cin iubacaad ab eae bh cxduntanennsodvaneteacs 
The Genuineness of Acts—Paul Saw, Jesus—Paul was 
Unprepared—Paul’s Personal Testimony—The Concur- 
rent Test. 


CHAPTER XIII 
The Chureh as Christ’s Monument............00000.c.ccccccccecesees 
Christ is Before Christianity—The Church, His Monu- 
ment—Its Growth—Not from Human Enthusiasm— 
Judaism Cannot Account for it—The Sacraments are 
a Monument. 


CHAPTER XIV 
HE i aS RST AIG OSM AP OO EN CCRT WNW Doe DL Ba 
Christianity and Christ in Prophecy—Jesus’ Kingdom 
was Prophesied—Jesus and the Apostles Prophesied. 


CHAPTER XV 
Test of Morality amd Experience ...0...0...........cccccccceeceeseesseereees 
Cardinal Doctrines—God—Man the Sinful Child— 
Salvation—Atonement—Christian Morals—-Experience 
—Jesus Christ and the Great World War—Conclusion. 


109 


115 


121 


Page 
ACTS, GenvINeNness OL Uy Ai iatscdadawatos adoaeeeenvadteaneoeateme ata’ 109 
DoW Ces 6b WUE YRC eR AES FLOM AAU OE UNE Ly AIL MEIER ities adap ERLE Aebawide 69 
PR TIS OLIN ec clay hac catoablee ocd dietaguut cee sewed auctuas Commo ne hatte seven neta Oki Uc amet 16 
ADTOLOPOLI CR ek eA ROR eae eae 9 
WAT CHCCOLO RY ye ar BU SE PER EN OY ot 9! A 49 
Fh ig £9 C0) | BAO RNG, ROB DML RRL ELAR REN Naat AVA relbs wm ECU Bee EE gs . 66 
VA TEST OLIO ss) dias cckoes sSuine dacs aL Ny ractndtlantoes ine actiiecs Sr eae eoeces 2 teen 17 
Authenticity of Old Testament 2...........ccccccsscssccccccsrssseeeces 46, 84 
Authenticity of the Resurrection ...........c.ccecesseseeeceeeeeeeeees 99 
Ba Maas ese AR a AEN Oo ek aca hina Gee 78 
Bapilides yee re ACL oe oe 68 
ES ULE 1 i ed eesybravaser tnagtavaetcadey cece 4nd ot veeWeata des anveninha Using se Oates aay am 112 
PIC ISU AHA T : Uilsccccy ue pascedeuled ad cat teyete bale sded anemia aioe neues canteen ane aan 52 
BIUCG,) (A DOLOREEICRS ii, ves scachys chcenecncouaueudcah tans tederlemnete vi enneionED 9 
Camppelbumey nw. by DD eae reread Sree 1, (lS 72825 
Carthace, | COanch: Of) we WGN sae oi Geka aneracie aan ea 82 
Oerdoiei esis aA AC gy Lees sskdbs cade dese Ueaeuanike eae Mi Neg oh CL 80 
OFC EL EVM aR RPE VEG aa UN Band a Ue BA Uk ib ch Ra iL De Wa ohn sh aN Pe Ye 38, 101 
ARETE HTS ea ee ae a at Ue a Se 69 
Character Ol: DW Osu gyi. cils sol acsertpeckceeatled Mensa cen ae isha . 92 
Character: of) Gospel Writers | ...cccliciisecesnescestecsnceeeraaestet 85, 86, 87 
COTY SOSGONA! UR icizssedetecsces PY ee EG MYA dear Ane ATT eat adeeaa 104, 114 
Church, the Monument: siete ey, oa eestueceee ae 15" 
Clarke.) Rey: Samuel ou DD n.2.5. aytk tclesdoec endo tag een 16 
LE} CWT LG BED T. MCUREE ORME RTP om REED GD MOMMA OMe RpriMn es: APE MAP OREN ESI 0,000. 8 57 
Glementivot Alewendria so ka a a eee an 64, 82 
WleamMent OL: ROM! 45; Nek sais detec contib'cescat ebicocslgns was espae  aieeee 79 
Codex Sin aitieus wey es de sl. joes cae ih kocsis aaah oleate ane a 83 
Cosmological AVE UM ENE ioc ciccs Uae. ko5sseasnccsaceeseodecsedtceetaenieennees 17 
ASTRO TTAL TTY | aicacchs eb evecss #s\GosGhlensednsbuhone opal avoceep oust panepeitesae manana 46, 84 
CRU ECL OV Le CCOES ic ei aes used dati St etencanveen Peder naee ema 50 
CAV TUG ibe uie widens Lika ueiick dn aliese aheteus covey tun sunk Kee ens abk CREa cane cue nCRaES uyal 
PTT hes a kee hak colada cad datas tha lah aekwlaas honed otal ot aaa ee ee SBy,. 
DET: ho S171 Ee yee OE a REE DRA tees sted i Made se Ure 8b! SI ead I “3 22 
MVATUON  orc7de,h-biaresssodb Ah aeshas dias dacadvasceresscshotesivn aGalia OMe tn man 52 
DICRCA TEC ict seki iis cbscbavebeudon| anode daniasud sos kughoucedecste deeb: saan eel! 16 
PIPBT RT ji oinchoctvesesevsodah ériudvadastrdon Wieekereesaendastohe se daee: scum Lata tai 19 
IOV PI i hs hei cadani oes choses ssdpostatlecaced sonet codecs dutees seek eee ere 22 
ENGEL (el 6 CP ae ee | EE ene SP amr: OR AGM Unt ee tyr. OR LEP ad! 68, 79 
PET VOT i ccteic ik: ceavaosvecwas puns dual dept caccmecasae 1c stera a sei sui ee cianaE tate eee ann * 52 
BUCO PRELGLIIE iS ooisadieecciwacsutss cus tseie seers tice Ben teuah sided epi 120 


PUPA OC 1G. DOSLAINIONE | iid shacceus ir ovediddsclatas Care slastedettecess 52 


Op SS NTs Pe pAcepte CURT SE IAL TP USIELS 5, SR DA! NM LEELA PIR ERIE AG a SNA 66, 82 
PAE et Xe ue A ake kia onoc as hate MecccoaetawadebaLind A dow atheadeney thos +o is Os bs 
cep OVE U6 AUR UOgGheh BUI E AEN OMA MLE FRET In REP 4a IC AA ORRIN 20,21 
EEE DECC GLOOM SAO RtC aD vaRED Ssh SEERA ed Be? Pn Hoa Ug URL 9 RE ly DA UES 27 
Pi ET AO PT Pe ee ap Se RN Mei roe, APE NRA TER AESOP etl: Hl ARE Ch fa pam pe 4 rs 
PUMP Y te IVE ATAAV ELD ees bs a AU siiuncdevsglas sikbapeatyadeserobaeweaboes Peateous 13, 90 
BREN I EMINENT GSS Ooch tev cs Rel ne goed ae aes te a ced ieee wun ity 46 
TRL GB BW ie ESSA a eit Pea A An SO ay NAS ECO a WR LN Ce prs i bes 
Sep IME Ne RO TE EOTICE 1 OVE L007 Si big a oa ciccbeiscntade Leaves tavatwiven eh vee somtantent 15 
MN MMMR NUR etn a8) 1265 Ura ask vasa cane cath keo ts enters vivados owshe sates tbcekeansnthaaei es 64, 67, 80 
SL LoTR e AER OS aR ta ie JA ESE Bat ROS CRE ARISES ta hs Pe ane Ce 2 REDE BWE HY! 94 
Wee APR IE STEN LEN cera ec tncdcstsesuhokdstiacdasvossvkaeuevestaoscube testes ees Bleuees 59 
PAPEL OE IN YS COLTESPONGENCE: ‘so jeccyccscesacecncesusodends-sbenstecacts 58 
Tague URIS SES A ES a a ae a ee EE SURI Po a TO AON GA 109, 115 
MEME MRM RATS Ty set Se ares eed ete co 5s sata We he dead nkachekpetededsacd amine 48 
ee Te A LATE U STO 302 coh cats ypc peace ss ccsuceee usasyacoucecacdosde coe toacedeanliie eis 48 
Me Pac ilise. ra pie Cebeat reat Paice dh vetoed avads cose ok CaN ACLS Hezca eae 16 
POULT ITCRA SSS PS RE ep ea at i AST BEE REE PREP NLA ST 34, 121 
MUMNNNR MRR can tes SOLO sR. See NY Lye cei edb esseknopuctdadestien ssammbead sam avieeake 33, 34, 99 
CRU ICS NEG SP a ara Ah eae a OL URI SD RUD URNEOS TAO NOY 8 
Sig Oh TLS Noe ARERR) Pr RU RAN AED, SOAS RCO ee ryt AEE 67 
PERT UALE EOLA) ol OLIT) nor danetivacnaes socnsgoennadios testuesnostusnsdehenbasacy 69 
ANTCSTICY © 10.00.0005. Pi ERR AIR NN iy SMe Ae AEE ny MERE ALIVE Ra Ne 46 
EMME MRORREEEITE SY LUT Ve eno can oe gk ng ok shes ccna Sed Soaccue rece Pode ean ge Re came abet 26 
OE NE OAS REE SEE SERIE SERRE a SDE OUP SERRE IN ONLI AL REO AD 62, 64 
Bee MRR TORVESERTOTE 26 dicc)5 sd 52 chars yap daeds caedconcas tema vacsek ca tecuuaen aia 59 
OMIA SEMUIIMOTOSS! OL! 52.0..ccsssenccocsiessocotossoctasccetuobhdosdaccecsaenteteg 62 
Swe VEO ey a aA ER RD oe RRR i OO MP HOG We AN NN 66 
MPR EMO PaN TNCHEE IESE Loo tek ab Ws dalcvns cage doncbs Sansa erboncayaue see ehabe cake ee 66 
EP USTOW EN ATER scl Pee b eadgdeweh Week cievsdpoous strat acdeauucatab ee cs ok 47, 58 
SONI en Ee Be eae cates Sal Wars ahansackedaunyepeces eioboddoncom causeuee 88 
Re MEME MEMORY OS TA VROREA LO iis ede. 0s invedgieains cceeedacs cenounhachsocsv i gosseeeeake 34 
NT Ghat ARS SR CO A TSI ine ne i) AE 65, 74, 121 
5 LIES SEAR IAS BIG BE er ANS Har cU N/E” WAVERED A CE GS 57, 63 
1d Seas REE a EASE od EERE HAE Sy SCE Re ae RAD SP GT 95 
SoM IIUNTLOTIOSS: OL. 5,5 5s05-scavasneas cchastsschesuspaddawssbedcssouetacuess 82 
SS PGE RRR RSE PSE SS eye ER pe 85, 86 
Ty RIG A ROSE SAG BER eR eee lak Dee ARN ALCL 85, 86 
Mark, Genuineness of Gospel .......... eeu ssebabdcennseae ache radee 73, 82 
Neen ra ud Pave Masse Wodacwaneated ceeniae 68, 80 
EM EN RA ERTEILOLOR OL. vccvccensdcecddvontuuecas schestsarvdeveavobevedatsies 85, 86 
Matthew, Genuineness Of Gospel ...........ccccsseeesescecseseesseeens 73, 82 
eM UEERIR CL aceite ts 0.0 65. os cbs dic desc topos serees als no shh oahanoerccaserdinhatuese 110 


Ee Re tue cule nsat acne a bisasges 70 


BERL LORI SOMA TE | vai arslivotsccseavenestasvarecocotss suas meee ceaaetune Rees M ob Bi 4) 
Miracles, Cause and. Weed “iia aa ea ates ee 30, 31 
Moral Argument ........c.c:cccccccaseseeees PRIMARY NEV LRRD tal re te a 22 
Moses, Writer of Pentateuch eee ie ee UPUREA YY MARNE NED Sy 51 
Mosheim ...... PV eeecas Go VEU ats natiosec ey a22k dae Milk digs pas can aa tae 60 
PEUTACOLIAN ) CANON 4 cotestscccmovdecseumer ocdidavkotnabeaatdteans Aarapeumunentnas 57, 65 
PETIA CLONSG Walircslackielsissatdoeveuihibiecieevena reps yeraes aa! A detrhiautax es eves teen 22 
New Testament Canon yy iesutany (2th dads doreuel nertae eeativee PM ste 61 
I) of Fe ie EE La ha bel RIM B Ie ARR EME, HURE a HOUSER NFO), 56 
Ontological Arguments oii ele ie cen ae 16 
A bc) | PROVO Cs PUES IN NSC IE LS pe MANS py AD NP esr) y Ny Soucy urns Ce big fad ICU" 82 
PA TIPE ST SI ee ee ele Oe Pa Rae a PED AR Nal Bede PTS) 31 
1 ig A: PRIDE ie AM RIL BUUREN Fa VAR US at Was nla udan anne 40, 41, 42, 109 
PADIAS iol. ETON U ana aN ECR RE aaron Mee Mca at UP ihe 66, 75 
Paulsen ..... MURTHY SL eas h RATES pt LONER Me ois be USUNNE, Tor ch 36 
Persecutions)) of) Christians (iucGAc nukes 56 
FOUTITY: ctr tvecs tues eUared dada pia eh cUiotlec ants COUR thea CAN DE Rare Cae A ea, 58, 116 
U Sele) hid oe Bg | MACE RET Seo ADT SOU CC MUISMOR MRC NA Mae LI irabihy FU. 65, 66 
Proof, Internal, External WL Laur boterend caceseee Lcweavas sateen ane Bi hE 
Prophecy, iiss biaalessisaadcedsdeceah Vauecad eeaewreeanwe auduuenet out iaactan ee aaanaame mY 121 
PROBATE | Seouker he Ake lyllaees fed ca tem cdanaeuucsd tad dad enlatace 1a ee ae cena 42, 48, 104 
Reuterdant ho oe hee eae Silas Spe aulup Ohuee de HOR Pod ies ana 19 
FLOUNSCA WH sual eel ig Da NUUAUAL  S t" eiaul Lava dock va datoeas 94 
Row, Manual of Christian Evidence ..............cceesceeseeceeeees 7 97 
Sacraments .............. Ud Fab ey SONNE AEE HEB RT Gin 500 maa 2 ides 1198 
ids T MOE SEL BEE PRR PEPER: CORAM DMR RE A eee e iMetd) ahs Bays. 0, 66, 112 
NGiontific ‘ObyJections Wives dcdcdc ee eae, Uy dae eee 35. 
BOC TA TOR et NEDO AUER AN Mis TRI TI BAeS ere ll Pgh 4 19 
PION COL Lievirccistcmacecapeeucteatisd eT AMl MAL aaAmN onthe lyse, eee Re 18 
SPRY EE COD77 I WRN iy Ra Aaa ian DERI PORE CR HOA dod Seine AM A Wieipzateplieed 31, 32 
‘*Spinozism, see Preface. 

Stearns ......... POL CGA EAN COD Dr be AU aia BE RURRD IB sfc Re Be WSU, hails Se eaten 11, 16 
SUPE COMI i ee ales eA ad 0 ie oe ihe 57 
SVNODCIC)! PODIOMS | sa, cles Ginccatpecih spcdsesvupedouaberdaaaeenne BW Ys te 73 
TACHI Feel ides decewes ese ab ogilba act hs deseo feb akekadededen Meihe Peet mraen ana 56, 110, 124 
SRPUELETD dc balcude tecedénnsdecuasdachspueuaie ddasene eden be chy ue ued sie AigcamnCeaie ae amen ; 65 
Thomas Aquinas ............ bvsili Lnaavondlcceaduhidetou/aluadeone loca meee ne aaiee By (Me 
Theophilus / OF sANCOCH ev eed chic Siena eects cua 65 
Tiberius ..... La eeWiade Vide HME dicdavede deities deh coke Evicted 56 
ob age Es i haps came LRU SNE A RC EM EO AA dR Pe deathavdnastedties 58 
ev hae 00) i crac hicahecs wh bau dldnioet teed lb daut Uae eee HPV ET ss. 64, 82 
Valentinus .............. EAT AER, ADEA att ME AME a CUI Pe ae eeDhadeh at elda uaaatiiebe 68 | 
Versions, Syriac and Latin i icddicsda ki ccs teste eue 65 
Wellhausen School ......... fo Kisicna Ua tehtakiic na beh aitace tant aati ena ane 50 


*For discussion of New Spinozism, "see Maher’s Psychoidgy, 
pp. 261, 505. . 








Date Due 


‘J a 


Bi 

S |G . 
mt oO 

o| 3 | 





lull 


Ih 


Wt 


1 1012 01015 9657 


~ 
= 
cS 
© 
2 
a 
i 
ea 
o 
a 
v7) 
f 
Pat 
= 
o 
S 
E 
av 
“ 
es 
4 
a 
2 
3 
ea 
= 
- 
c 
S 
a 
re) 
cc 
= 
a 











